From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Thu Oct 1 01:44:08 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 01:44:08 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] OregonRocketry Meeting Agenda October 1st, 2009 In-Reply-To: <654E214E56E1491FAD5A2B74A70C9224@LaptopKrausert> References: <654E214E56E1491FAD5A2B74A70C9224@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: If anyone going to the meeting has a scale I would be grateful if you would bring it with you. I need to weigh my project to get a good feel on what motors to use. Chris Guenther On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 4:57 PM, Robert Krausert wrote: > The next Oregon Rocketry club meeting will be held at 7:30 pm on October > 1st, 2009. Meeting place is the back room of Giovanni's in Beaverton, > Oregon. > > Where: Giovanni's > 12390 SW Broadway: corner of Broadway and Hall Blvd in downtown Beaverton, > Oregon 97005 > > Agenda: > 7:30 : Welcome New Members > 7:35 : Memorial Park Launch @ Wilsonville Announcement [Packard] > 7:40 : Rocketober Announcement [Krausert] > 7:45 : Financial Update [Moscoe] > 7:50 : Sheridan Recap [Krausert] > 7:55 : Show & Tell by Members [Guenther] > 8:10 : Show & Tell by Members [Bogdanich] > > > Take a break from your busy schedule and join us Thursday October 1st, 2009 > at 7:30pm for some fun and rocket talk. Come early for dinner. > > Cheers, > Robert > OregonRocketry President > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From jhadv at pacifier.com Thu Oct 1 08:27:58 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (Paul Bogdanich) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:27:58 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Cool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20091001080341.00bd82b8@mail.iinet.com> >2nd half of the video: Sprint missile. First stage 6900Kn (AA motor?) in >1.2 seconds, 100+ G acceleration, zero to Mach 10 in 5 seconds. Even >MikeF may be jealous ;) As near as I can tell Sprint is the fastest sustained G force acceleration ever built. It pulls 130 + Gs for over a second on the first stage. Second stage data is still classified to my knowledge. The first stage on a sprint is shaped like a cone and its an end burner. So as it burns the surface area of the first stage propellant decreases proportionally as the mass of the rocket decreases. That's how they get a sustained 100. That is why I get suspicious of all these claims of 100G rockets in the hobby here. The altimeters we use might give a peak reading of 100Gs, I believe that but the time to height data simply doesn't match a 100G flight irrespective of what the accelerometer reports. No way. The only launch I have ever seen that credibly was over 75 Gs sustained for any measurable length of time was Fishers 38mm L5000 and that thing was bang - out of sight. The accelerometer there (a 250 G Parrot) indicated that it broke 100G for about two tenths of a second. The other hellacious acceleration is the Russian S-500 version 5. It accelerates 0 to 5,000 meters/sec in the first several hundred meters of flight! Figure that one out However after that the acceleration is small. Time to target is way fast but virtually all the acceleration is in the first milliseconds after ignition. Again, bang - gone. From ryanbuettner5000 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 1 09:21:31 2009 From: ryanbuettner5000 at yahoo.com (Ryan Buettner) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 09:21:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Aeropoxy... In-Reply-To: <1418547B47904070A047043DDEC1CC9B@DellNotebook> References: <1418547B47904070A047043DDEC1CC9B@DellNotebook> Message-ID: <850374.33472.qm@web58605.mail.re3.yahoo.com> I have been using this stuff for years and the one thing that I know about it, is that it is thick.? If you are using ES6209 A/B it makes for good building, but not so good for glassing (to thick, hard to work with).? Keep it as warm as possible for ease of mixing, but be prepared for long cure times.??It will flow out a bit so try and keep any drips wiped clean.? This epoxy hardens realy hard, and has a really long cure time,?and is a pain to sand.? So save your self some head aches and keep some paper towels handy and when doing your fin fillets.? Check on them often for the first 2-4 hrs after applying.? Once you get use to using it, and you see the performance you will use it on all your big projects. ________________________________ From: John Armitage To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 8:18:21 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] Aeropoxy... Ok, so I am sloooooowly working on my Wildman Extreme. I decide to try 'the best' and buy a quart kit of Aeropoxy from Giant Leap. It sits in my garage for a couple of months. I finally open the cans to find the thickest epoxy components I've ever seen. The Resin and Hardener are the consistency of, oh say, real maple syrup that has been in a really cold fridge. Ok, that's different. I mix up about 20cc's. Normally I mix inside the syringe using the long stir sticks like you use at Starbucks. Not this stuff. Not in the syringe. Not with those sticks. I gotta dump the goo on wax paper and get popsicle sticks; I should have used my bondo paddles. The stuff is like taffy. Flow? Ohhh, no. It barely oozes Did I get a reeeeealy old batch, or is this 'normal'? John Armitage SLC Tacoma 253-205-7722? txt or voice jjarmitage at earthlink.net notebook and Palm _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Thu Oct 1 14:38:47 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 14:38:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Cool In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20091001080341.00bd82b8@mail.iinet.com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20091001080341.00bd82b8@mail.iinet.com> Message-ID: I once successfully flew a three-foot long Zn/S rocket that, as best as I could determine from 8mm movie frames, had a 0.08 - 0.1 second thrust time. It was a nozzleless straight-tube design with 71% mix to demonstrate the dependence of burn rate on composition. "Thumbtack" smoke trail. :) A comparison rocket with 80% mix had a much longer thrust time with the same burst diaphram. Both were fiberglassed cardboard tubes, probably the origin of my epoxy sensitivity. The old rule of thumb with Zn/S powder was 90 in/sec, the 80% mix was close but the 71% was around 300. THUMP, zip, gone. But neither one even broke Mach 1. +McG+ >>2nd half of the video: Sprint missile. First stage 6900Kn (AA motor?) in >>1.2 seconds, 100+ G acceleration, zero to Mach 10 in 5 seconds. Even >>MikeF may be jealous ;) > > > As near as I can tell Sprint is the fastest sustained G force acceleration > ever built. It pulls 130 + Gs for over a second on the first > stage. Second stage data is still classified to my knowledge. The first > stage on a sprint is shaped like a cone and its an end burner. So as it > burns the surface area of the first stage propellant decreases > proportionally as the mass of the rocket decreases. That's how they get a > sustained 100. That is why I get suspicious of all these claims of 100G > rockets in the hobby here. The altimeters we use might give a peak > reading > of 100Gs, I believe that but the time to height data simply doesn't match > a > 100G flight irrespective of what the accelerometer reports. No way. The > only launch I have ever seen that credibly was over 75 Gs sustained for > any > measurable length of time was Fishers 38mm L5000 and that thing was bang - > out of sight. The accelerometer there (a 250 G Parrot) indicated that it > broke 100G for about two tenths of a second. The other hellacious > acceleration is the Russian S-500 version 5. It accelerates 0 to 5,000 > meters/sec in the first several hundred meters of flight! Figure that one > out However after that the acceleration is small. Time to target is way > fast but virtually all the acceleration is in the first milliseconds after > ignition. Again, bang - gone. > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From jjarmitage at earthlink.net Fri Oct 2 00:17:18 2009 From: jjarmitage at earthlink.net (John Armitage) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 00:17:18 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Aeropoxy... In-Reply-To: References: <1418547B47904070A047043DDEC1CC9B@DellNotebook> Message-ID: <7E6D4C6A0C734F52AA664F5A49C0438F@DellNotebook> Ok, sounds like I've got the thick stuff. I'll keep it warm and cozy. Thanks all. -----Original Message----- From: Scott T Bowers [mailto:scott at scottsrockets.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 9:37 PM To: 'John Armitage'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Aeropoxy... There is more than one thickness of aeropoxy, that sounds like structural and not a laminating epoxy. Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of John Armitage Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 8:18 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Aeropoxy... Ok, so I am sloooooowly working on my Wildman Extreme. I decide to try 'the best' and buy a quart kit of Aeropoxy from Giant Leap. It sits in my garage for a couple of months. I finally open the cans to find the thickest epoxy components I've ever seen. The Resin and Hardener are the consistency of, oh say, real maple syrup that has been in a really cold fridge. Ok, that's different. I mix up about 20cc's. Normally I mix inside the syringe using the long stir sticks like you use at Starbucks. Not this stuff. Not in the syringe. Not with those sticks. I gotta dump the goo on wax paper and get popsicle sticks; I should have used my bondo paddles. The stuff is like taffy. Flow? Ohhh, no. It barely oozes Did I get a reeeeealy old batch, or is this 'normal'? John Armitage SLC Tacoma 253-205-7722 txt or voice jjarmitage at earthlink.net notebook and Palm _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From scott at scottsrockets.com Fri Oct 2 03:56:31 2009 From: scott at scottsrockets.com (Scott T Bowers) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 03:56:31 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Aeropoxy... In-Reply-To: <7E6D4C6A0C734F52AA664F5A49C0438F@DellNotebook> References: <1418547B47904070A047043DDEC1CC9B@DellNotebook> <7E6D4C6A0C734F52AA664F5A49C0438F@DellNotebook> Message-ID: You can cut it with regular alcohol too. Just make sure it is the 99% alcohol. Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of John Armitage Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 12:17 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Aeropoxy... Ok, sounds like I've got the thick stuff. I'll keep it warm and cozy. Thanks all. -----Original Message----- From: Scott T Bowers [mailto:scott at scottsrockets.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 9:37 PM To: 'John Armitage'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Aeropoxy... There is more than one thickness of aeropoxy, that sounds like structural and not a laminating epoxy. Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of John Armitage Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 8:18 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Aeropoxy... Ok, so I am sloooooowly working on my Wildman Extreme. I decide to try 'the best' and buy a quart kit of Aeropoxy from Giant Leap. It sits in my garage for a couple of months. I finally open the cans to find the thickest epoxy components I've ever seen. The Resin and Hardener are the consistency of, oh say, real maple syrup that has been in a really cold fridge. Ok, that's different. I mix up about 20cc's. Normally I mix inside the syringe using the long stir sticks like you use at Starbucks. Not this stuff. Not in the syringe. Not with those sticks. I gotta dump the goo on wax paper and get popsicle sticks; I should have used my bondo paddles. The stuff is like taffy. Flow? Ohhh, no. It barely oozes Did I get a reeeeealy old batch, or is this 'normal'? John Armitage SLC Tacoma 253-205-7722 txt or voice jjarmitage at earthlink.net notebook and Palm _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 2 11:41:41 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 11:41:41 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] I need to borrow a 38mm/1080 motor casing Message-ID: I will need a 38mm/1080 motor casing for Rocketober at Brothers coming up. I live in the Portland area and can pick up one locally and return after the event. Or if you are going to be at Rocketober that would be great. From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 2 16:01:17 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 16:01:17 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] I need to borrow a 38mm/1080 motor casing Message-ID: I have acquired the casing. Thank you everyone for quick responses and offers. From roger at ressmeyer.com Fri Oct 2 19:56:09 2009 From: roger at ressmeyer.com (Roger Ressmeyer) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 19:56:09 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Low-Power Rocket Sites Message-ID: <002401ca43d5$0fe08d70$2fa1a850$@com> Hi, it's been a while due to business concerns that have resolved. I'm glad to be back on this list. I need your help; sorry if I've missed a recent, relevant post on this: Where can we launch rockets closest to downtown Seattle for groups of school children, that isn't a long drive away? Often my school launches are during school time, but a club I'm planning at SCDS (a school in Queen Anne) require late afternoon and weekend hours, when soccer is at its peak. On Sunday September 20, I did a launch for a bunch of school kids at 60-Acres (as I often have). I was deeply saddened to see the field gone; we had to sneak my trailer onto the site and launch in the back 25% of the land, which hadn't yet been ripped up. Any suggestions or thoughts would be greatly appreciated. On another note, I attended and photographed up-close the September 10th Ares-DM1 rocket test at ATK in Utah. I'll provide a link when all the photos have been posted. It was awesome, right down to the familiar smell of spent fuel when we visited the beast just 90 minutes after the firing. Later, and thanks, Roger Ressmeyer From gbhchrist at verizon.net Fri Oct 2 20:55:05 2009 From: gbhchrist at verizon.net (George Christ) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 20:55:05 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Low-Power Rocket Sites In-Reply-To: <002401ca43d5$0fe08d70$2fa1a850$@com> References: <002401ca43d5$0fe08d70$2fa1a850$@com> Message-ID: <61D073813BAC41CF83D77BCE1C2E93D4@LittleGoodBox> Roger (and all who may not know), While King County Parks finally did lease 60 Acres South to Lake Washington Youth Soccer Association (LWYSA) and they are renovating it for use as soccer fields...and parking, the upside to this is that LWYSA has become *much* more reasonable about rocketry use of both halves of 60 Acres. Essentially, we can fly off of the fields as individuals and small groups anytime they are not being used for soccer. For larger rocketry events, LWYSA accepts reservations for field use -- again, as long as it does not conflict with soccer events. Not only have we been able to have monthly informal WAC launch events most months for the past year, tomorrow afternoon will be our (Sammamish Trails District, BSA) Cub Scout Rocket Launch. Whereas King County Parks used to charge us up to $260 in 2001 - 2007 for a four-hour reservation, LWYSA in the last two years has not charged for field use...at least so far, and we are practicing "Leave No Trace" to be responsible users and maintain that goodwill. You can use www.60acres.org to view the field to determine availability for ad-hoc use, or to contact LWYSA to reserve the field for an event. George Christ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roger Ressmeyer" To: Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 7:56 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] Low-Power Rocket Sites > Hi, it's been a while due to business concerns that have resolved. I'm > glad > to be back on this list. > > > > I need your help; sorry if I've missed a recent, relevant post on this: > Where can we launch rockets closest to downtown Seattle for groups of > school > children, that isn't a long drive away? Often my school launches are > during > school time, but a club I'm planning at SCDS (a school in Queen Anne) > require late afternoon and weekend hours, when soccer is at its peak. > > > > On Sunday September 20, I did a launch for a bunch of school kids at > 60-Acres (as I often have). I was deeply saddened to see the field gone; > we > had to sneak my trailer onto the site and launch in the back 25% of the > land, which hadn't yet been ripped up. > > > > Any suggestions or thoughts would be greatly appreciated. > > > > On another note, I attended and photographed up-close the September 10th > Ares-DM1 rocket test at ATK in Utah. I'll provide a link when all the > photos have been posted. It was awesome, right down to the familiar smell > of spent fuel when we visited the beast just 90 minutes after the firing. > > > > Later, and thanks, > > Roger Ressmeyer > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From roger at ressmeyer.com Sat Oct 3 00:54:55 2009 From: roger at ressmeyer.com (Roger Ressmeyer) Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 00:54:55 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Low-Power Rocket Sites In-Reply-To: <61D073813BAC41CF83D77BCE1C2E93D4@LittleGoodBox> References: <002401ca43d5$0fe08d70$2fa1a850$@com> <61D073813BAC41CF83D77BCE1C2E93D4@LittleGoodBox> Message-ID: <000a01ca43fe$ccaaa4d0$65ffee70$@com> Wow, how does one contact LWYSA? Is there a backup field ANYWHERE for launches during soccer events? The existing fields were full on Sunday the 20th of September....totally full. Thanks, Roger Ressmeyer -----Original Message----- From: George Christ [mailto:gbhchrist at verizon.net] Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 8:55 PM To: Roger Ressmeyer; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Low-Power Rocket Sites Roger (and all who may not know), While King County Parks finally did lease 60 Acres South to Lake Washington Youth Soccer Association (LWYSA) and they are renovating it for use as soccer fields...and parking, the upside to this is that LWYSA has become *much* more reasonable about rocketry use of both halves of 60 Acres. Essentially, we can fly off of the fields as individuals and small groups anytime they are not being used for soccer. For larger rocketry events, LWYSA accepts reservations for field use -- again, as long as it does not conflict with soccer events. Not only have we been able to have monthly informal WAC launch events most months for the past year, tomorrow afternoon will be our (Sammamish Trails District, BSA) Cub Scout Rocket Launch. Whereas King County Parks used to charge us up to $260 in 2001 - 2007 for a four-hour reservation, LWYSA in the last two years has not charged for field use...at least so far, and we are practicing "Leave No Trace" to be responsible users and maintain that goodwill. You can use www.60acres.org to view the field to determine availability for ad-hoc use, or to contact LWYSA to reserve the field for an event. George Christ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roger Ressmeyer" To: Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 7:56 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] Low-Power Rocket Sites > Hi, it's been a while due to business concerns that have resolved. I'm > glad > to be back on this list. > > > > I need your help; sorry if I've missed a recent, relevant post on this: > Where can we launch rockets closest to downtown Seattle for groups of > school > children, that isn't a long drive away? Often my school launches are > during > school time, but a club I'm planning at SCDS (a school in Queen Anne) > require late afternoon and weekend hours, when soccer is at its peak. > > > > On Sunday September 20, I did a launch for a bunch of school kids at > 60-Acres (as I often have). I was deeply saddened to see the field gone; > we > had to sneak my trailer onto the site and launch in the back 25% of the > land, which hadn't yet been ripped up. > > > > Any suggestions or thoughts would be greatly appreciated. > > > > On another note, I attended and photographed up-close the September 10th > Ares-DM1 rocket test at ATK in Utah. I'll provide a link when all the > photos have been posted. It was awesome, right down to the familiar smell > of spent fuel when we visited the beast just 90 minutes after the firing. > > > > Later, and thanks, > > Roger Ressmeyer > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From gbhchrist at verizon.net Sat Oct 3 11:45:49 2009 From: gbhchrist at verizon.net (George Christ) Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 11:45:49 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Low-Power Rocket Sites In-Reply-To: <000a01ca43fe$ccaaa4d0$65ffee70$@com> References: <002401ca43d5$0fe08d70$2fa1a850$@com> <61D073813BAC41CF83D77BCE1C2E93D4@LittleGoodBox> <000a01ca43fe$ccaaa4d0$65ffee70$@com> Message-ID: The preferred way to contact LWYSA for field reservations is through the "Request a Field" link on the left edge of www.60acres.org. That website also has live camera feeds of both the north and south fields, so it is easy to determine current field usage before departing for the field to do an ad-hoc (unreserved) event. If you just want straightforward contact information, here is the address and phone number information from the "About Us" link: 12525 Willows Road NE, Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98034-8796 Phone: 425-821-1741 Fax: 425-820-0702 Office Hours are Monday through Thursday from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Friday is by Appointment Only The office is closed in December As for backup field options, the official answer is that 60 Acres remains the only public land in King County where model rocketry is supported. Unofficially, there are school fields and large parks in various locations where you may be able to arrange to hold a launch. Since the group you are working with is a school club, you may want to see whether the associated school district will assist the club by identifying the district's most suitable school field and helping arrange an approved time for rocketry use that will not conflict with other activities. George ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roger Ressmeyer" To: "'George Christ'" ; Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 12:54 AM Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Low-Power Rocket Sites > Wow, how does one contact LWYSA? > > Is there a backup field ANYWHERE for launches during soccer events? The > existing fields were full on Sunday the 20th of September....totally full. > > Thanks, > > Roger Ressmeyer > > -----Original Message----- > From: George Christ [mailto:gbhchrist at verizon.net] > Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 8:55 PM > To: Roger Ressmeyer; rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Low-Power Rocket Sites > > Roger (and all who may not know), > > While King County Parks finally did lease 60 Acres South to Lake > Washington > Youth Soccer Association (LWYSA) and they are renovating it for use as > soccer fields...and parking, the upside to this is that LWYSA has become > *much* more reasonable about rocketry use of both halves of 60 Acres. > > Essentially, we can fly off of the fields as individuals and small groups > anytime they are not being used for soccer. For larger rocketry events, > LWYSA accepts reservations for field use -- again, as long as it does not > conflict with soccer events. Not only have we been able to have monthly > informal WAC launch events most months for the past year, tomorrow > afternoon > > will be our (Sammamish Trails District, BSA) Cub Scout Rocket Launch. > Whereas King County Parks used to charge us up to $260 in 2001 - 2007 for > a > four-hour reservation, LWYSA in the last two years has not charged for > field > > use...at least so far, and we are practicing "Leave No Trace" to be > responsible users and maintain that goodwill. > > You can use www.60acres.org to view the field to determine availability > for > ad-hoc use, or to contact LWYSA to reserve the field for an event. > > George Christ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Roger Ressmeyer" > To: > Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 7:56 PM > Subject: [RocketsNW] Low-Power Rocket Sites > > >> Hi, it's been a while due to business concerns that have resolved. I'm >> glad >> to be back on this list. >> >> >> >> I need your help; sorry if I've missed a recent, relevant post on this: >> Where can we launch rockets closest to downtown Seattle for groups of >> school >> children, that isn't a long drive away? Often my school launches are >> during >> school time, but a club I'm planning at SCDS (a school in Queen Anne) >> require late afternoon and weekend hours, when soccer is at its peak. >> >> >> >> On Sunday September 20, I did a launch for a bunch of school kids at >> 60-Acres (as I often have). I was deeply saddened to see the field gone; >> we >> had to sneak my trailer onto the site and launch in the back 25% of the >> land, which hadn't yet been ripped up. >> >> >> >> Any suggestions or thoughts would be greatly appreciated. >> >> >> >> On another note, I attended and photographed up-close the September 10th >> Ares-DM1 rocket test at ATK in Utah. I'll provide a link when all the >> photos have been posted. It was awesome, right down to the familiar >> smell >> of spent fuel when we visited the beast just 90 minutes after the firing. >> >> >> >> Later, and thanks, >> >> Roger Ressmeyer >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > From carl at mousetrap.com Sat Oct 3 13:35:53 2009 From: carl at mousetrap.com (Carl Hamilton) Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 13:35:53 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Reminder: Washington Aerospace meeting tonight Message-ID: The Washington Aerospace October meeting will be held tonight, starting at 7:00PM. It will be held at Microsoft Building 43 in Redmond, *not* at the church in Puyallup. Please try to arrive a few minutes early so that we can let you in. Hope to see you there. - Carl From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Sat Oct 3 20:34:54 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 20:34:54 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Low explosives user permits? Message-ID: I am studying for NAR L2 and have been hit with questions about low explosives user permits. I do not need one to buy motor in my own state but if I go to an event in another state and wish to by a reload on site the test questions are saying I will need one? I thought the ATF lost that law suit. Is it possible I am studying old material? I am getting it right off the NAR web site. The url for it is http://www.nar.org/hpcert/hptest_part_A.html I got that url from the NAR Member Guide book that I received in the mail yesterday. So I see no reason the test questions should not be up to date. Anyone who can tell me if the Low Explosives User Permit is actually required to by a motor at an out of state event or not please do. From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Sat Oct 3 21:41:57 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 21:41:57 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: NAR L2 Cert Study test is wrong In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Christopher Guenther Date: Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 9:39 PM Subject: NAR L2 Cert Study test is wrong To: webmaster at nar.org I am trying to study for my L2 certification test and have found a major error within the NAR website and in the new NAR Members Guide book I received yesterday. In the Guide it gives a url for a practice test which is out dated and has the wrong questions and answers. The url is http://www.nar.org/hpcert/hptest_part_A.html The right test study is in PDF at http://www.nar.org/pdf/HP-question-pool.pdf This is ok but the way the first mentioned functions is far better even though it is the wrong one. I would have a better time if the PDF one that is the right one worked like the other. I also am lucky to have checked both ways of getting to the study guide. since I studied the wrong one first. If I had not notice this discrepancy I would have most likely failed my Level 2 Certification test. I feel that would be unfair to me or any other person that may study the wrong one. From pmschurke at seattleschools.org Sun Oct 4 07:41:10 2009 From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org (Schurke, Peter) Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:41:10 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: NAR L2 Cert Study test is wrong References: Message-ID: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B3002BE@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> Chris (and everyone else), As it turns out, you can study the old question pool and still pass the new test--as long as you don't get anything else wrong. One of my students took her L2 test a couple of weeks ago--she too had studied the old question pool. She got everything that hadn't changed correct and still scored plenty to pass the test. Of course..as a teacher, I can't advise studying the wrong material. Hopefully everybody thinking about an L2 soon will learn from your near miss with "Oopsville". Thanks for the Public Service Announcement! NAR should probably remove all traces of the old question pool from their website to prevent similar confusion in the future. Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St. Seattle, WA 98133 ________________________________ From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Christopher Guenther Sent: Sat 10/3/2009 9:41 PM To: s-and-t at nar.org Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: NAR L2 Cert Study test is wrong ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Christopher Guenther Date: Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 9:39 PM Subject: NAR L2 Cert Study test is wrong To: webmaster at nar.org I am trying to study for my L2 certification test and have found a major error within the NAR website and in the new NAR Members Guide book I received yesterday. In the Guide it gives a url for a practice test which is out dated and has the wrong questions and answers. The url is http://www.nar.org/hpcert/hptest_part_A.html The right test study is in PDF at http://www.nar.org/pdf/HP-question-pool.pdf This is ok but the way the first mentioned functions is far better even though it is the wrong one. I would have a better time if the PDF one that is the right one worked like the other. I also am lucky to have checked both ways of getting to the study guide. since I studied the wrong one first. If I had not notice this discrepancy I would have most likely failed my Level 2 Certification test. I feel that would be unfair to me or any other person that may study the wrong one. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Sun Oct 4 10:18:08 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 10:18:08 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Low explosives user permits? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000001ca4516$a5086bb0$ef194310$@com> The ATF ruling of APCP as an explosive was overturned through the court case and you no longer need a LEUP to purchase motors/reloads. While individual states might have other requirements for handling what they consider hazardous materials, the federal restriction is gone. -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Low explosives user permits? I am studying for NAR L2 and have been hit with questions about low explosives user permits. I do not need one to buy motor in my own state but if I go to an event in another state and wish to by a reload on site the test questions are saying I will need one? I thought the ATF lost that law suit. Is it possible I am studying old material? I am getting it right off the NAR web site. The url for it is http://www.nar.org/hpcert/hptest_part_A.html I got that url from the NAR Member Guide book that I received in the mail yesterday. So I see no reason the test questions should not be up to date. Anyone who can tell me if the Low Explosives User Permit is actually required to by a motor at an out of state event or not please do. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From bwhitemarsh at comcast.net Sun Oct 4 22:03:06 2009 From: bwhitemarsh at comcast.net (Bryan Whitemarsh) Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 22:03:06 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS 18 pics Message-ID: <97518D12F2784895B371AC2525DA38E7@BryanDesktop> Posted a few pics of this weekend's carnage here: http://bwhitemarsh.smugmug.com/gallery/9857332_5Qn3U#P-1-15 Made me realize I have a lot to learn about rocketry (and photography). Please let me know if there is a picture you would like me to remove. Thanks to those who attended. Looking forward to next year! Bryan Whitemarsh From adrian.l.carbine at gmail.com Sun Oct 4 22:41:19 2009 From: adrian.l.carbine at gmail.com (Adrian L Carbine) Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 22:41:19 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS 18 pics In-Reply-To: <97518D12F2784895B371AC2525DA38E7@BryanDesktop> References: <97518D12F2784895B371AC2525DA38E7@BryanDesktop> Message-ID: Thanks for posting the photos, including the one of my "Triple Threat" 3-stage liftoff. I'll post the flight details in a day or two, but the short story is that the sustainer flew to 61k+ MSL (57k+ AGL), and recovered fine 3 miles away. The second stage was fine, too, landing 2 miles away. The first stage landed just a few hundred yards from the pad, and sustained slight damage from a hard landing (torn chute). The crush tube at the aft end of the rocket got crunched a little, but it was disposable anyway. The boost was really straight, with no wobble or arcing at staging, and everything worked. I was just glad to finally be able to actually fly it! Great trip, good weather (at least until Saturday afternoon's windstorm), spectacular scrap burn-piles, and some really amazing flights. --- Adrian On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 10:03 PM, Bryan Whitemarsh wrote: > Posted a few pics of this weekend's carnage here: > http://bwhitemarsh.smugmug.com/gallery/9857332_5Qn3U#P-1-15 Made me > realize > I have a lot to learn about rocketry (and photography). Please let me know > if there is a picture you would like me to remove. Thanks to those who > attended. Looking forward to next year! > > Bryan Whitemarsh > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Sun Oct 4 23:17:47 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 23:17:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS 18 pics In-Reply-To: References: <97518D12F2784895B371AC2525DA38E7@BryanDesktop> Message-ID: <03bba41c74dfcf72bdab273b453edb21.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Congrats Adrian! Now you can rest on your laurels and just hang around at launches flying Estes telling rocket stories and drinking Margaritas. ;-) No, wait. There's still 38k more... +McG+ > Thanks for posting the photos, including the one of my "Triple Threat" > 3-stage liftoff. > > I'll post the flight details in a day or two, but the short story is that > the sustainer flew to 61k+ MSL (57k+ AGL), and recovered fine 3 miles > away. > The second stage was fine, too, landing 2 miles away. The first stage > landed > just a few hundred yards from the pad, and sustained slight damage from a > hard landing (torn chute). The crush tube at the aft end of the rocket got > crunched a little, but it was disposable anyway. The boost was really > straight, with no wobble or arcing at staging, and everything worked. I > was > just glad to finally be able to actually fly it! > > Great trip, good weather (at least until Saturday afternoon's windstorm), > spectacular scrap burn-piles, and some really amazing flights. > > --- Adrian > > On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 10:03 PM, Bryan Whitemarsh > wrote: > >> Posted a few pics of this weekend's carnage here: >> http://bwhitemarsh.smugmug.com/gallery/9857332_5Qn3U#P-1-15 Made me >> realize >> I have a lot to learn about rocketry (and photography). Please let me >> know >> if there is a picture you would like me to remove. Thanks to those who >> attended. Looking forward to next year! >> >> Bryan Whitemarsh >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From vonrang at yahoo.com Mon Oct 5 04:28:29 2009 From: vonrang at yahoo.com (Sam Grado) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 04:28:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] B/KNO3 ratio Message-ID: <517051.40118.qm@web52204.mail.re2.yahoo.com> What is the ratio of KNO3 to Boron for B/KNO3 igniter composition? Sam Grado TRA L2 "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! http://www.pvconly.com http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets samgrado at pvconly.com From ds at pacificrocketry.com Mon Oct 5 07:29:39 2009 From: ds at pacificrocketry.com (Denny Smith) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 07:29:39 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS 18 pics In-Reply-To: <97518D12F2784895B371AC2525DA38E7@BryanDesktop> References: <97518D12F2784895B371AC2525DA38E7@BryanDesktop> Message-ID: <000301ca45c8$4585c1d0$d0914570$@com> Bryan Thanks for the photos. Those are great. Adrian...that was a great flight. Well done. We'll be back with another 6" P next year. Can't say the same for Starsky & Hutch. Might just have to focus on one big project at a time :) -Denny -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bryan Whitemarsh Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 10:03 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS 18 pics Posted a few pics of this weekend's carnage here: http://bwhitemarsh.smugmug.com/gallery/9857332_5Qn3U#P-1-15 Made me realize I have a lot to learn about rocketry (and photography). Please let me know if there is a picture you would like me to remove. Thanks to those who attended. Looking forward to next year! Bryan Whitemarsh _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From jrcoxx at gmail.com Mon Oct 5 09:27:37 2009 From: jrcoxx at gmail.com (John Cox) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 09:27:37 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS 18 pics In-Reply-To: References: <97518D12F2784895B371AC2525DA38E7@BryanDesktop> Message-ID: <4d5ff6a50910050927u522511b0wcacfe5bbd8eb5f52@mail.gmail.com> Adrian Congratulations. Wish I could have been there to see the flight. John On 10/4/09, Adrian L Carbine wrote: > Thanks for posting the photos, including the one of my "Triple Threat" > 3-stage liftoff. > > I'll post the flight details in a day or two, but the short story is that > the sustainer flew to 61k+ MSL (57k+ AGL), and recovered fine 3 miles away. > The second stage was fine, too, landing 2 miles away. The first stage landed > just a few hundred yards from the pad, and sustained slight damage from a > hard landing (torn chute). The crush tube at the aft end of the rocket got > crunched a little, but it was disposable anyway. The boost was really > straight, with no wobble or arcing at staging, and everything worked. I was > just glad to finally be able to actually fly it! > > Great trip, good weather (at least until Saturday afternoon's windstorm), > spectacular scrap burn-piles, and some really amazing flights. > > --- Adrian > > On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 10:03 PM, Bryan Whitemarsh > wrote: > >> Posted a few pics of this weekend's carnage here: >> http://bwhitemarsh.smugmug.com/gallery/9857332_5Qn3U#P-1-15 Made me >> realize >> I have a lot to learn about rocketry (and photography). Please let me >> know >> if there is a picture you would like me to remove. Thanks to those who >> attended. Looking forward to next year! >> >> Bryan Whitemarsh >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From bradwr at wrightholdings.com Mon Oct 5 13:32:44 2009 From: bradwr at wrightholdings.com (Brad Wright) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 20:32:44 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS Lost and Found Message-ID: <3A117F0D50887C4EAA3B35717ADE209914EEB781@BL2PRD0102MB003.prod.exchangelabs.com> So just minutes before the wind storm on Sat I was coming back from recovery out to the far NE and came across a chute and nose cone (not connected due to the use of a non-forged eye-bolt). I grabbed it as the storm was getting going and it wouldn't have been there in a few mins. It's a Orange and Black TAC-1 chute and a conical nosecone. In the nose is a somewhat damaged Walston. If someone lost this tell me what size nose and ratio and the walston freq and I'll get it right back to ya. b From bennightfam at hotmail.com Mon Oct 5 15:35:03 2009 From: bennightfam at hotmail.com (C Bennight) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 15:35:03 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS 18 pics In-Reply-To: <97518D12F2784895B371AC2525DA38E7@BryanDesktop> References: <97518D12F2784895B371AC2525DA38E7@BryanDesktop> Message-ID: That was quite impressive. Thanks for the photos. Mike Bennight > From: bwhitemarsh at comcast.net > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 22:03:06 -0700 > Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS 18 pics > > Posted a few pics of this weekend's carnage here: > http://bwhitemarsh.smugmug.com/gallery/9857332_5Qn3U#P-1-15 Made me realize > I have a lot to learn about rocketry (and photography). Please let me know > if there is a picture you would like me to remove. Thanks to those who > attended. Looking forward to next year! > > Bryan Whitemarsh > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/ From jhadv at pacifier.com Mon Oct 5 14:28:00 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (Paul Bogdanich) Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:28:00 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] B/KNO3 ratio In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20091005135811.02fbb440@mail.iinet.com> >What is the ratio of KNO3 to Boron for B/KNO3 igniter composition? Complex question. if one assumes that the reduction reaction is 6KNO3 + 10B = 3K2O + 3N2 + 5B2O3 then the stoimetric ratio is 84.87% KNO3 to 15.13% B with evolved heat of 1.487 kcal/g or 3.321 kcal/cc. However experimental evidence suggests that at high temperatures the reduction reaction is 2KNO3 + 5B = K2O + N2 + 5BO in which case the stoimetric ratio would be 78.91% KNO3 to 21.09% B with evolved heat of approximately 1.638 kcal/g or 3.569 kcal/cc. However Ellren suggests that the standard military formulation is 71% KNO3 + 24%B + 5% polymerizing resin or binder. So this suggests that the optimal mixture is based on the BO reduction reaction with a slight excess of metal which is pretty standard in ignition formulations. However this is not the problem with this formulation for use in small rockets. The problem is that in practice, the only way to make any of these compositions work properly is if the KNO3 + B fuel powder, pellets or grains are contained in a basket, perforated tube or other similar device. Any loose powder, pellets or grains of any of the above mixtures in a rocket motor will simply propel themselves out the nozzle without lighting the motor first or if the motor does light it will not be a good solid ignition. It is however a really pretty green flame. Kind of like a drug that tastes great but doesn't cure the disease. From Mfreptiles at aol.com Mon Oct 5 15:52:12 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 18:52:12 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] B/KNO3 ratio Message-ID: My favorite igniters are KP based with lots of scrap milled TI. Boron is too expensive IMO. Mike F. From vonrang at yahoo.com Mon Oct 5 15:55:24 2009 From: vonrang at yahoo.com (Sam Grado) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 15:55:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] B/KNO3 ratio In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20091005135811.02fbb440@mail.iinet.com> Message-ID: <376234.44327.qm@web52201.mail.re2.yahoo.com> "However this is not the problem with this formulation for use in small rockets.? The problem is that in practice, the only way to make any of these compositions work properly is if the KNO3 + B fuel powder, pellets or grains are contained in a basket, perforated tube or other similar device.? Any loose powder, pellets or grains of any of the above mixtures in a rocket motor will simply propel themselves out the nozzle without lighting the motor first or if the motor does light it will not be a good solid ignition." ? Perhaps both a binded mixture on the match could be place in a perforated paper straw sealed with hot glue, much like the method used by Nakka (straw igniter) & Yawn (christmas bulb/straw igniter) for a small (38mm) motor. ? I am primarily interested in its properties as a primer dip to ignite a more thermic mixture over coating?such as KClO3/Magnalium/CuO mixtures. Sam Grado TRA L2 "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! sales at pvconly.com http://www.pvconly.com http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets --- On Mon, 10/5/09, Paul Bogdanich wrote: From: Paul Bogdanich Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] B/KNO3 ratio To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Date: Monday, October 5, 2009, 2:28 PM > What is the ratio of KNO3 to Boron for B/KNO3 igniter composition? ? ? ? ? Complex question.? if one assumes that the reduction reaction is 6KNO3 + 10B = 3K2O + 3N2 + 5B2O3 then the stoimetric ratio is 84.87% KNO3 to 15.13% B with evolved heat of 1.487 kcal/g or 3.321 kcal/cc.? However experimental evidence suggests that at high temperatures the reduction reaction is 2KNO3 + 5B = K2O + N2 + 5BO in which case the stoimetric ratio would be 78.91% KNO3 to 21.09% B with evolved heat of approximately 1.638 kcal/g or 3.569 kcal/cc.? However Ellren suggests that the standard military formulation is 71% KNO3 + 24%B + 5% polymerizing resin or binder.? So this suggests that the optimal mixture is based on the BO reduction reaction with a slight excess of metal which is pretty standard in ignition formulations. ? ? ? ? However this is not the problem with this formulation for use in small rockets.? The problem is that in practice, the only way to make any of these compositions work properly is if the KNO3 + B fuel powder, pellets or grains are contained in a basket, perforated tube or other similar device.? Any loose powder, pellets or grains of any of the above mixtures in a rocket motor will simply propel themselves out the nozzle without lighting the motor first or if the motor does light it will not be a good solid ignition.? It is however a really pretty green flame.? Kind of like a drug that tastes great but doesn't cure the disease. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From vonrang at yahoo.com Mon Oct 5 15:56:06 2009 From: vonrang at yahoo.com (Sam Grado) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 15:56:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] B/KNO3 ratio In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <300677.53133.qm@web52204.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Yes, it is not cheap at all. Sam Grado TRA L2 "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! sales at pvconly.com http://www.pvconly.com http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets --- On Mon, 10/5/09, Mfreptiles at aol.com wrote: From: Mfreptiles at aol.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] B/KNO3 ratio To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Date: Monday, October 5, 2009, 3:52 PM My favorite igniters are KP based with lots of scrap milled TI.? Boron? is too expensive IMO. Mike F. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ? From sb at berfield.com Mon Oct 5 16:08:12 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 16:08:12 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] B/KNO3 ratio Message-ID: <200910052308.n95N8Ddv008364@omr11.networksolutionsemail.com> Yea - boron is crazy expensive. -----Original Message----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 3:52 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] B/KNO3 ratio My favorite igniters are KP based with lots of scrap milled TI. Boron is too expensive IMO. Mike F. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Mon Oct 5 16:08:16 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 16:08:16 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS 18 pics References: <97518D12F2784895B371AC2525DA38E7@BryanDesktop> Message-ID: <17CA4CC0EE084850B6DF15E7C6C46723@LaptopKrausert> Adrian, Very cool to read that Triple Threat flew and performed great. You've had the challenges last year with last minute, no and yes statements from TRA. I'm sure the booster damage will get fixed quickly, as I'm sure you've already got your CF repair kit ready. So are you going to change its name? Is the rocket now Triple Reality? ;-) Well done. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian L Carbine" To: "Bryan Whitemarsh" Cc: Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 10:41 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] BALLS 18 pics > Thanks for posting the photos, including the one of my "Triple Threat" > 3-stage liftoff. > > I'll post the flight details in a day or two, but the short story is that > the sustainer flew to 61k+ MSL (57k+ AGL), and recovered fine 3 miles > away. > The second stage was fine, too, landing 2 miles away. The first stage > landed > just a few hundred yards from the pad, and sustained slight damage from a > hard landing (torn chute). The crush tube at the aft end of the rocket got > crunched a little, but it was disposable anyway. The boost was really > straight, with no wobble or arcing at staging, and everything worked. I > was > just glad to finally be able to actually fly it! > > Great trip, good weather (at least until Saturday afternoon's windstorm), > spectacular scrap burn-piles, and some really amazing flights. > > --- Adrian > > On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 10:03 PM, Bryan Whitemarsh > wrote: > >> Posted a few pics of this weekend's carnage here: >> http://bwhitemarsh.smugmug.com/gallery/9857332_5Qn3U#P-1-15 Made me >> realize >> I have a lot to learn about rocketry (and photography). Please let me >> know >> if there is a picture you would like me to remove. Thanks to those who >> attended. Looking forward to next year! >> >> Bryan Whitemarsh >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From Mfreptiles at aol.com Mon Oct 5 16:14:54 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 19:14:54 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Balls report Message-ID: Balls didn't happen for me. My torque convertor went out shortly after I hit I-5. Massive vibration and loss of power. I limped back to town on back roads and got it to the transmission shop. On the plus side, I'm a year ahead of schedule for BALLS 2010 prep. Mike F. From adrian.l.carbine at gmail.com Mon Oct 5 16:16:02 2009 From: adrian.l.carbine at gmail.com (Adrian L Carbine) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 16:16:02 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Triple Threat images posted Message-ID: I just posted a couple of images from Balls 2009 on the NW Rocketry web site, from my 3-stage "Triple Threat" flight on Friday afternoon. I uploaded a nice liftoff shot by Brad Wright, and a Google Earth screen shot of the flight path, downloaded from the on-board BeelineGPS. According to the GPS data, the sustainer reached an altitude of 61637 ft MSL (57757 ft AGL) and landed about 3 miles away in fine condition. The 2nd stage landed only 2 miles from the pad, also in good shape, and the first stage landed a few hundred yards from the pad. It landed a little hard due to a stripped chute, but was only slightly damaged, easily repaired. Having a crush tube at the aft end helped. I'll post a few more details in a day or two. --- Adrian From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Mon Oct 5 16:28:36 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 16:28:36 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Balls report References: Message-ID: Isn't that a legitimate reason to involk the "take over a civilian vehicle" clause? Would think in such a circumstance you should be able to pull over, and flag down a passing vehicle. Then explain you're on the way to BALLS and explain you're taking over their vehicle for the good of humanity. Tell them to limp your vehicle back to the nearest trannie shop, and you proceed to 38mm destiny on the playa. If this were XPRS, I could understand. But for BALLS, I think any civilian would have understood. Who knows, they might have even been willing to pick up the torque converter repair cost. Plus wash the rig before you get home. ;-) Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] Balls report > Balls didn't happen for me. My torque convertor went out shortly after I > hit I-5. Massive vibration and loss of power. I limped back to town on > back roads and got it to the transmission shop. > > On the plus side, I'm a year ahead of schedule for BALLS 2010 prep. > > Mike F. > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com Mon Oct 5 16:36:18 2009 From: john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com (john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 16:36:18 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Balls report In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841B62F9C54@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> Better then, as compared to the desolation between Cedarville and Gerlach.... The weather could have been better, but I've seen it much worse. All in all, there were only a couple dozen notable flights, before the weather deteriorated. Hopefully we'll have better weather next year. John ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] Balls report > Balls didn't happen for me. My torque convertor went out shortly after I > hit I-5. Massive vibration and loss of power. I limped back to town on > back roads and got it to the transmission shop. > > On the plus side, I'm a year ahead of schedule for BALLS 2010 prep. > > Mike F. > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From clappfamily at comcast.net Mon Oct 5 17:41:41 2009 From: clappfamily at comcast.net (ClappFamily) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 17:41:41 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Triple Threat images posted References: Message-ID: I just posted a few of my photos of Triple Threat! :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian L Carbine" To: "OROC List" Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 4:16 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] Triple Threat images posted >I just posted a couple of images from Balls 2009 on the NW Rocketry web > site, from my 3-stage "Triple Threat" flight on Friday afternoon. I > uploaded a nice liftoff shot by Brad Wright, and a Google Earth screen > shot > of the flight path, downloaded from the on-board BeelineGPS. According to > the GPS data, the sustainer reached an altitude of 61637 ft MSL (57757 ft > AGL) and landed about 3 miles away in fine condition. The 2nd stage landed > only 2 miles from the pad, also in good shape, and the first stage landed > a > few hundred yards from the pad. It landed a little hard due to a stripped > chute, but was only slightly damaged, easily repaired. Having a crush tube > at the aft end helped. I'll post a few more details in a day or two. > > --- Adrian > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Mon Oct 5 18:10:07 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 18:10:07 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Cover Shot... Re: Triple Threat images posted References: Message-ID: <88F90EE1F80C402EB97D36B9977C8AD2@LaptopKrausert> OK, I'm not a critic, but I have seen my favorite of the Triple Threat image. But let me first say a few comments. Image: Adrian with the top stage about 3.5 miles from the pad, by Rick Clapp http://www.northwestrocketry.com/uploads/IMG_9988.JPG This is a great shot. Especially of Adrian. He's either thinking, "it all worked, Yes!!!" or Adrian is thinking, "Do I really need to clean all this up?" Image: Triple Threat on it's wat to a new complex "O" record by Rick Clapp http://www.northwestrocketry.com/uploads/IMG_0175c.JPG This is a great shop of the lift off, no doubt. Really shows the size and power in this lift off. Image: Triple Threat, on its way to 61K ft MSL by Brad Wright http://www.northwestrocketry.com/uploads/BALLS18-205.jpg This one image. Brad a great shot, and Rick I truly mean no disrespect. But Brad you captured the elements. The mountain range and clouds in the distance with a great perspective of Triple Threat with them in the background. Very much an amazing shot. This should be the cover of the next Rockets Magazine cover. I kick myself each year for missing this event. But the great pictures you all have provided helps. Well, kind of. But I truly think Rockets Magazine needs to review that picture. Perfect balance of background and clean rocket shot. I see a cover shot. Cheers, Robert If you make a general reply, by so kind as to remove Rockets Magazine from the thread. I included to push for a cover shot. Neil and Bob have other things to do than delete email. Especially mine. ;-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "ClappFamily" To: "OROC List" Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 5:41 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Triple Threat images posted >I just posted a few of my photos of Triple Threat! :-) > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Adrian L Carbine" > To: "OROC List" > Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 4:16 PM > Subject: [RocketsNW] Triple Threat images posted > > >>I just posted a couple of images from Balls 2009 on the NW Rocketry web >> site, from my 3-stage "Triple Threat" flight on Friday afternoon. I >> uploaded a nice liftoff shot by Brad Wright, and a Google Earth screen >> shot >> of the flight path, downloaded from the on-board BeelineGPS. According to >> the GPS data, the sustainer reached an altitude of 61637 ft MSL (57757 ft >> AGL) and landed about 3 miles away in fine condition. The 2nd stage >> landed >> only 2 miles from the pad, also in good shape, and the first stage landed >> a >> few hundred yards from the pad. It landed a little hard due to a stripped >> chute, but was only slightly damaged, easily repaired. Having a crush >> tube >> at the aft end helped. I'll post a few more details in a day or two. >> >> --- Adrian >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From andrewm at hawkfeather.com Mon Oct 5 20:45:21 2009 From: andrewm at hawkfeather.com (Andrew MacMillen) Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 20:45:21 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] WAC October meeting minutes Message-ID: <4ACABD51.8050901@hawkfeather.com> The Washington Aerospace meeting minutes for October are online at: http://www.washingtonaerospace.org/news0910.php Andrew. From absworld at cet.com Mon Oct 5 19:11:25 2009 From: absworld at cet.com (Bob & Ann Yanecek) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 19:11:25 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] flying dawg balls report Message-ID: <012301ca462a$4f6f5eb0$ee4e1c10$@com> Balls-18 - D.A.W.G. Pack Recap: The DAWGs left Otis Orchards, Washington and headed for the playa of Black Rock at 1PM Wednesday, 09/30. This year we had our 5th upgrade to the mobile doghouse (nicknamed the "kennel") provided by Jim Jopson, which made traveling, eating, socializing and sleeping more comfortable than ever. Pack members making the trip in the kennel this year were Jim Jopson, Mark Howe, Ray Stoner, Keith Stormo, Marty Weiser and Bob Yanecek. The longer range of the newer kennel allowed us to skip a gas stop and even though we left about an hour later than the year before, we arrived at the playa about the same time, ~12PM Thursday. We also had a chase truck provided by Ray Stoner towed by the kennel so we were pretty much self-sufficient. After disem"bark"ing from the kennel we proceeded with camp setup. Everyone was in a hurry because the weather forecast for the weekend didn't look that great and we all wanted to start prepping our rockets to get as many flights in as possible on Friday. Jims' brother Chuck and his friend Charlie drove up from Northern California and joined us on the playa. Chuck was going to fly his plane to the site as he did last year but with the iffy forecast decided to drive instead. Charlie was a first-timer and came to spectate. Kent & Kari Newman arrived in their RV, followed by the other west-siders (Brad & Angela Wright, Jim Wilkerson, Denny Smith, and Andy Casillas). We were all located together on the east side of the flight line right next to Team Numb out of Portland, OR. Mark (with a lot of advance prep work from his wife), was the designated chef and provided dinners for the extended dawg pack and most of the west-siders. Thursdays' selection was a cheese & cracker appetizer with the main course being a chicken and broccoli casserole over egg noodles. Chuck and Charlie handled the breakfast duties for the pack over the weekend while lunches were an "on your own" affair with plenty of goods in fridge. After dinner was over the socializing began in earnest, with groups forming to discuss this year's projects and aspirations up and down the flight line. Prepping rockets took a back seat to seeing old acquaintances and meeting new people in the hobby. Propellant burns, fireworks, and bowling ball cannon shots were seen and heard throughout the night. Friday dawned cold and clear. Ray opened the top of a water bottle and the contents flashed into slush right before his eyes. Soon prep mode was back in full swing. The first flying dawg off the pad (or, in this case out of tower) was Bob. He launched a 75mm minimum diameter rocket named "Dual-75" on a six grain M1110 using the packs' version of Orange Sunset propellant. Actually, all of the dawg motors flown at this years' event used Orange Sunset. Unfortunately, similar to last year, the push was too great for Bob's "new and improved" fin attachment design and the fins once again stripped from the fin can. Examination of the recovered pieces indicated that fin flutter caused the carbon fiber cloth to delaminate from the G10 fin cores. Next up was Ray with another minimum diameter rocket. His "Sun Scream" used a six grain 54mm K508. His earlier repair of a crack in the body tube was insufficient and the rocket shredded. On the positive side his all-aluminum altimeter bay survived and the electronics were intact. Mark then flew his very first research motor, a four grain 38mm I138 in a modified LOC Vulcanite. It was also his first electronics flight. Not being totally confident in his Cambridge IA-X96 accelerometer he opted to have a backup, which was provided by a special forward closure machined by Ray that allowed for motor based chute ejection. It's based on the AeroTech design, but with snap rings instead of screw threads. Everything worked perfectly, (motor ejection and dual-deploy electronics) and even though the flight came in lower than anticipated Mark was happy with the 4,096' altitude recorded by the device. Pack flight #4 was provided by Jim Jopson with his "Min 38", a minimum diameter 38mm nine grain J340 motor which was housed in a hand rolled all carbon fiber airframe and nose cone. The Parrot electronics reported a max altitude of 14,162'. The last pack flight of the day was by Marty and his "Aqua Bucks", a 2-stage minimum diameter creation that used a five grain 75mm M993 in the booster and a seven grain 54mm L804 in the sustainer. The boost was good but the sustainer motor cato'd early into its burn. The Perfect Flite electronics for the sustainer reported 8,336', while the booster coasted to a reported 13,984', and perfect recovery. Dinner for this day was dry-rubbed London Broil, with green salad and homemade potato salad. We traded some with Neal Anderson who was camped on the other side of us and in return received some barbequed baby-back ribs which he slow cooked all afternoon. Neil also gave crabs to nearly everyone in the Northwest contingent. Those King Crab legs were incredibly delicious. Charlie provided homemade apple & pumpkin pies for desert.no one can accuse us of not eating well on the playa (or anywhere for that matter)! Saturday arrived with spotted cloud cover, but the forecasted cold front was on its way and expected to bring high wind with it in the early afternoon. Another pack member, Rob Jopson (Jim's son) arrived via car with his cousin Tim and Grandma "Gran" Jolee. Rob started his aerospace engineering degree at the University of Washington last week, and flew into Reno Friday night with hopes of launching his 75mm all carbon fiber Level-3 project for a shakedown flight. Those wishing to try additional launches, (Ray, Marty and Jim) were also prepping hoping to make the weather window. Grandma Jolee kept us on our toes with her rocket related questions and in stitches with her quick wit as she knitted an afghan throughout the day. We all hope she comes back next year! Ray and Marty completed their prep tasks first and took their rockets out to the towers. Ray was able to launch his venerable "Fresh(er) Paint", which was the rocket he used to achieve his Level-3 cert. It's a 98mm diameter rocket which housed a seven grain 75mm M1450 motor. Unfortunately the recently rebuilt fin can separated from the airframe and came in ballistic.time to build another one! The Perfect Flite electronics which was recovered reported an altitude of 18,736'. As Ray and some of the crew were out on recovery and with Marty still setting up at the tower, the cold front finally moved in bringing with it a fairly decent dust storm. Those of us remaining in camp hurried to keep everything not secured from blowing away. Range operations were shutdown for the day.it was only 1PM. Marty had to pull his rocket from the tower and neither Jim nor Rob got the opportunity to fly. After the dust (but not the wind) had subsided, Mark and Bob went on a grid search trying to locate additional parts of Bobs' rocket from the day before. The search was unsuccessful from their standpoint, but they did manage to find a 4"x4" fragment of a metal fin from the Tripoli UMERG rocket. We returned the piece and found out they were hosting an open liquor bar for the rest of the afternoon along with the two kegs that were flown earlier at the event.whohooo! The Launch Control Officer (LCO) was replaced by a new LCO (Liquor Consumption Officer) and the party was on. Some of the tent-people (and even a few RVs) decided to make an early weekend of it and headed for the hills. Pete from Team Numb came over around 4PM and invited everyone to go to the "frog pond" (hot springs) located to the north of the site. Many dawg pack members took him up on the offer. Dinner consisted of Cajun Lake Shrimp over fresh linguini, green salad, warm pugliase bread, and more pies, this time donated by Kari Newman. Sunday was windy and cold. Marty and Rob, who were determined to fly, continued to prep with an eye on the weather. However, after we watched a few other rockets fly, we all decided to cash it in. Chuck and Charlie were the first to go, followed by "Gran", Tim and Rob. We finished packing up the kennel, attached the chase truck to the tow bar and left the flight line at 11:35AM. We're gonna be back next year bigger and (hopefully) better than ever! As we did last year, we would like to thank the BALLS organizers from AHPRA and XRAA for a very well run event. It was also great hang out with our friends from the Northwest and elsewhere along with making new friends. Robo-Pop Howe-n-Dawg RayHound Stormy MartyMutt BobDawg From Mfreptiles at aol.com Mon Oct 5 21:19:13 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 00:19:13 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] flying dawg balls report Message-ID: Nice to see that the Orange Sunset formula got flown a lot at this years event. Mike F. From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Tue Oct 6 00:33:44 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 00:33:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] B/KNO3 ratio In-Reply-To: <200910052308.n95N8Ddv008364@omr11.networksolutionsemail.com> References: <200910052308.n95N8Ddv008364@omr11.networksolutionsemail.com> Message-ID: <818ee17e28d5afd80c730cd0ecd35f01.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> There aren't any really good cheap routes to make reasonably pure elemental boron. The commercial stuff is generally high grade. Impure boron can be made by magnesium reduction but not in air. Determined hobbyists could do this but then you have to ask yourself, why? There are other much easier ways to make effective igniters. In hobby rocketry, BKNO3 is a solution looking for a problem. That was my conclusion. +McG+ > Yea - boron is crazy expensive. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mfreptiles at aol.com > Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 3:52 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] B/KNO3 ratio > > My favorite igniters are KP based with lots of scrap milled TI. Boron is > too expensive IMO. > > Mike F. From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Tue Oct 6 00:41:58 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 00:41:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Balls report In-Reply-To: <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841B62F9C54@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix .net> References: <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841B62F9C54@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> Message-ID: <3de12d9b56559e437323e1a228f03cdb.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> John Lyngdal wrote: > Better then, as compared to the desolation between Cedarville and > Gerlach.... Oh yeah! Heading out on that stretch always gives me little chills up and down my spine. Long way from nowhere out there with little traffic. Especially at night when I usually drove it. If you break down, just start setting up camp... +McG+ > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 4:14 PM > Subject: [RocketsNW] Balls report > > >> Balls didn't happen for me. My torque convertor went out shortly after >> I >> hit I-5. Massive vibration and loss of power. I limped back to town >> on >> back roads and got it to the transmission shop. >> >> On the plus side, I'm a year ahead of schedule for BALLS 2010 prep. >> >> Mike F. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Tue Oct 6 01:16:01 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 01:16:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] flying dawg balls report Message-ID: <90b7d8244a9479ddde1ee7a5e2e1458a.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Oh man five-star cuisine on the playa! I remember the good old days of the early 1980's RRI launches at Smoke Creek where the menu once offered ravioli-in-the-can-off-the-playa. In-the-can because it was before those pull-tabs and I forgot the !@#$ can opener and off-the-playa because I had to improvise with tools available... Rocketeers are getting soft I tell you! Soft! :) Dang I wish I could make it back to Black Rock with a big ass rocket. And camp next to someone giving away free crab. Hope the dawg pack has better luck next year! +McG+ From vonrang at yahoo.com Tue Oct 6 04:42:25 2009 From: vonrang at yahoo.com (Sam Grado) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 04:42:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] B/KNO3 ratio In-Reply-To: <818ee17e28d5afd80c730cd0ecd35f01.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Message-ID: <6120.38908.qm@web52208.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Well I already have mine, so the expense was not that punitive. After all it is not palladium. The problem needing a solution is a hard to ignite composition. The solution worth investigating is B/KNO3 and it seem to look like a good one. ? I did some dips last night as a primer for a bridge-wire igniter. I then did a more conventional over-coating of KClO3/magnalium/CuO mix. ? A second?batch received a final coat of B/KNO3. A test firing of both kinds of igniters was done. Both look very energetic, but the igniter with the final over-coating of B/KNO3 has the most intense flare. It had the classic initial "pop", brilliant white hot incandescence with white hot slag as well as large hot flames from the B/KNO3. ? Now I just need to fire a few AP/KP/CP motors with it. ? Sam Grado TRA L2 "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! sales at pvconly.com http://www.pvconly.com http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets --- On Tue, 10/6/09, kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com wrote: From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] B/KNO3 ratio To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Date: Tuesday, October 6, 2009, 12:33 AM There aren't any really good cheap routes to make reasonably pure elemental boron.? The commercial stuff is generally high grade. Impure boron can be made by magnesium reduction but not in air. Determined hobbyists could do this but then you have to ask yourself, why? There are other much easier ways to make effective igniters. In hobby rocketry, BKNO3 is a solution looking for a problem.? That was my conclusion. +McG+ > Yea - boron is crazy expensive. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mfreptiles at aol.com > Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 3:52 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] B/KNO3 ratio > > My favorite igniters are KP based with lots of scrap milled TI.? Boron? is > too expensive IMO. > > Mike F. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ? From scott at scottsrockets.com Tue Oct 6 04:54:32 2009 From: scott at scottsrockets.com (Scott T Bowers) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 04:54:32 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Triple Threat images posted In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: That's some good stuff Adrian, way to represent the Northwest! Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of ClappFamily Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 5:42 PM To: OROC List Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Triple Threat images posted I just posted a few of my photos of Triple Threat! :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian L Carbine" To: "OROC List" Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 4:16 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] Triple Threat images posted >I just posted a couple of images from Balls 2009 on the NW Rocketry web > site, from my 3-stage "Triple Threat" flight on Friday afternoon. I > uploaded a nice liftoff shot by Brad Wright, and a Google Earth screen > shot > of the flight path, downloaded from the on-board BeelineGPS. According to > the GPS data, the sustainer reached an altitude of 61637 ft MSL (57757 ft > AGL) and landed about 3 miles away in fine condition. The 2nd stage landed > only 2 miles from the pad, also in good shape, and the first stage landed > a > few hundred yards from the pad. It landed a little hard due to a stripped > chute, but was only slightly damaged, easily repaired. Having a crush tube > at the aft end helped. I'll post a few more details in a day or two. > > --- Adrian > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From rocketsrfun at msn.com Tue Oct 6 06:07:57 2009 From: rocketsrfun at msn.com (Don Harris) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 06:07:57 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Triple Threat images posted In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sounds like it was an awesome flight Adrian. Too bad this was my skip year for BALLS, but hopefully I'll get a chance to see it next year. Don ----- Original Message ----- From: Adrian L Carbine To: OROC List Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 4:16 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] Triple Threat images posted I just posted a couple of images from Balls 2009 on the NW Rocketry web site, from my 3-stage "Triple Threat" flight on Friday afternoon. I uploaded a nice liftoff shot by Brad Wright, and a Google Earth screen shot of the flight path, downloaded from the on-board BeelineGPS. According to the GPS data, the sustainer reached an altitude of 61637 ft MSL (57757 ft AGL) and landed about 3 miles away in fine condition. The 2nd stage landed only 2 miles from the pad, also in good shape, and the first stage landed a few hundred yards from the pad. It landed a little hard due to a stripped chute, but was only slightly damaged, easily repaired. Having a crush tube at the aft end helped. I'll post a few more details in a day or two. --- Adrian _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From rocketsrfun at msn.com Tue Oct 6 06:11:05 2009 From: rocketsrfun at msn.com (Don Harris) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 06:11:05 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Balls report In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike, sorry to hear about your vehicle malfunction, but there is a reason for everything. You may figure out you need to fine tune something that's really important. On a good note (for me) I get to see it next year. Don ----- Original Message ----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] Balls report Balls didn't happen for me. My torque convertor went out shortly after I hit I-5. Massive vibration and loss of power. I limped back to town on back roads and got it to the transmission shop. On the plus side, I'm a year ahead of schedule for BALLS 2010 prep. Mike F. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From vonrang at yahoo.com Tue Oct 6 06:25:03 2009 From: vonrang at yahoo.com (Sam Grado) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 06:25:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Balls report In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <624060.6784.qm@web52211.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Mike am am sorry to hear about the car trouble that hamstrung your trip. I am glad you got home safely! ? Yes Mike, people also tell me, that "everything happens for a reason"! ? It's just that when I hear it from them, it sounds like "anything can happen with a razor". 8^{P Sam Grado TRA L2 "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! sales at pvconly.com http://www.pvconly.com http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets --- On Tue, 10/6/09, Don Harris wrote: From: Don Harris Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Balls report To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Date: Tuesday, October 6, 2009, 6:11 AM Mike, sorry to hear about your vehicle malfunction, but there is a reason for everything. You may figure out you need to fine tune something that's really important. On a good note (for me) I get to see it next year. Don ? ----- Original Message ----- ? From: Mfreptiles at aol.com ? To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ? Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 4:14 PM ? Subject: [RocketsNW] Balls report ? Balls didn't happen for me.? My torque convertor went out shortly? after I ? hit I-5.? Massive vibration and loss of power.? I limped back? to town on ? back roads and got it to the transmission shop.? ??? ? On the plus side, I'm a year ahead of schedule for BALLS 2010 prep. ??? ? Mike F. ??? ??? ? _______________________________________________ ? Rockets mailing list ? Rockets at rocketsnw.com ? http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ? ? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ? From Mfreptiles at aol.com Tue Oct 6 08:07:46 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 11:07:46 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Balls report Message-ID: Yes, there were a few things that happened over the weekend that made that quite obvious. Mike In a message dated 10/6/2009 6:26:17 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, vonrang at yahoo.com writes: Yes Mike, people also tell me, that "everything happens for a reason"! From Mfreptiles at aol.com Tue Oct 6 08:14:14 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 11:14:14 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers Message-ID: What did you used for airframe? Mike In a message dated 10/6/2009 7:55:36 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes: Motors worked fantastic - Rick Clapp has decent shots of both at lift-off - I was proud to see the OSS modified w/ Oxamide take off with a vengeance, but about 4-seconds into the burn, the airframe decided to let go below the coupler joint and about 2-inches above the motor - it was the only airframe brought to the BlackRock desert. From Mfreptiles at aol.com Tue Oct 6 08:29:39 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 11:29:39 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Triple Threat images posted Message-ID: Nice job Adrian! Also the guys who got such great liftoff photos! Time to put some EX motors in it with tailored burn profiles for each stage. A wired end burner in the sustainer would be most excellent. :) Mike F. From Mfreptiles at aol.com Tue Oct 6 09:08:11 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:08:11 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers Message-ID: That's what I was afraid of. I was concerned that my 3" Extreme tubing would meet a similar fate after talking to Al Goncalves, who has shredded the HM Extreme tubing on minimum diameter M's. I don't know how Jack Caynon's held together, but it was not minimum diameter either. Looks like I'm stripping some paint and adding some carbon sleeve. If you shredded it on OS propellant, I've got problems. Mike F. In a message dated 10/6/2009 8:58:39 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes: Alan @ Hawk Mountain touts his "extreme" 98mm FWFG as N-Class capable - as it seems I either ended up with a defect / bad batch or this stuff is over-rated. I plan to CFD analyze this off-season as an exercise to step up my game plan for next year's project - I've got the motor thing down, just need to get the airframe construction on par. /Steve From sb at berfield.com Tue Oct 6 12:21:34 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:21:34 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers Message-ID: I have seen FWFG fail on a lot less oomph than these motors pu tout. I think the nature of the material means that a small flaw can have a disproportionate result under the stresses we tend to put on the material. The failures I have seen tend to look like the tube sort of unwound. I am no engineer (and don't even play at being one) but I wonder if the stuff is as strong as it should be in the direction of thrust. -----Original Message----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2009 09:08 AM To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers That's what I was afraid of. I was concerned that my 3" Extreme tubing would meet a similar fate after talking to Al Goncalves, who has shredded the HM Extreme tubing on minimum diameter M's. I don't know how Jack Caynon's held together, but it was not minimum diameter either. Looks like I'm stripping some paint and adding some carbon sleeve. If you shredded it on OS propellant, I've got problems. Mike F. In a message dated 10/6/2009 8:58:39 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes:Alan @ Hawk Mountain touts his "extreme" 98mm FWFG as N-Class capable - as it seems I either ended up with a defect / bad batch or this stuff is over-rated. I plan to CFD analyze this off-season as an exercise to step up my game plan for next year's project - I've got the motor thing down, just need to get the airframe construction on par. /Steve_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Tue Oct 6 16:58:34 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 16:58:34 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Reminder; OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket Launch Event October 16th - 18th 2009 Message-ID: <5F487F5E2D704CBAA623759B532AE10A@LaptopKrausert> Reminder; up coming launch event. I think we've all notice the weather changes have transitioned fast. Please prepare for cold temperatures. The weather might be warmer, but prepare (in layers) for everything. This is the Oregon sage desert. No telling what will happen. The May launch brought us nice temperatures late into the night. While July and August was very cold at night. If it is colder and cloudy, you still need to bring plenty of water and sunscreen. If you're bringing kids (and hope you do), please also pay close attention to them. If you're feeling the chill, they are too. Plus make sure you enforce them to stay hydrated and with suncreen. Even with a cloud deck, you're 4500 feet closer to the ozone layer. You can still get a sunburn or wind-burn if you're not careful. Those that arrive and appear unprepared for the elements will be asked to leave. Your pain in the neck club President wished you all a great time and experience. But I will never waiver on health and safety, that is my and this clubs priority. Keep yourself and your family healthy and safe during the event. That's all I ask. Except to have a great time too. Cheers, Robert Notice: OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to announce our Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th through 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join us for a very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific Northwest. You are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry begins with OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for OregonRocketry. We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are one. This launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining flights. October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are welcome to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with TRA research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are allowed to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, and invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the prep area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets on Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor days. Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do not need to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, and spend some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday and 8:00am to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need something on your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in the dark. But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those glow sticks taped to rockets can work. The onsite FSO will need to make sure everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before committing. They may have ideas. This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have some ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During the day and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or treat you to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep them at bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a long day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the center one, located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. Also, consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like devices at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the community fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's up to them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety code. As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit the OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and TRA websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to comprehend and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be reviewed by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If you are bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about stability, center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and complex rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the public. We certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of fun. We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA clearance to 25,000 feet above sea level (or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules are 75% of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or 15,375 feet AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high enough to keep everyone happy. Directions: We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers launch site. At this web URL, there are two directions. http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create any more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. The firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have a fire Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk and good times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some firewood. We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally get to watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us have been out there till 3am and later. New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch site, and has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to be prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, sunburns can happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And sun-screen, sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site to learn more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we expect to have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to the site. http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running of the event. Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare you and your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or hot, water is so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group healthy. Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to have one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day and that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at 9:30am Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th through 18th. Cheers, Robert OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER From dmrandall at gmail.com Tue Oct 6 18:35:08 2009 From: dmrandall at gmail.com (Dave Randall) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 18:35:08 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] U4EA Video from XPRS 2009 Message-ID: <6bc920e40910061835w12582c75s927483f63f872786@mail.gmail.com> I posted the in-rocket video of U4EA on youtube. Link here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUMVKWMMsiE Enjoy! -- - Dave From MartyWeiser at comcast.net Tue Oct 6 18:41:45 2009 From: MartyWeiser at comcast.net (Marty Weiser) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 18:41:45 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00a601ca46ef$56580ea0$03082be0$@net> Filament wound tube can take the stresses we apply during high performance flights, but based upon the broken piece of Hawk Mountain tube I have I don't believe it is designed for what we do to it. I have a piece of 4" tube that is about 3 years old that I shredded at BALLS in 2007 (the G10 fin also delaminated during that flight). The tube is wound at about a 70 degree angle from the axis and uses a fairly small number of layers of a fairly large tow (about 0.100" wide by 0.010 - 0.015" thick). In addition, it appears that the tows in opposite directions are not woven together very often if at all (I should dissolve the epoxy from a section and take a look sometime). For body tube I would like to see the winding done at an angle of 20 - 40 degrees from the axis using a smaller tow that is woven together fairly frequently - about every 4 tows seems right. This will orient the fibers primarily along the axis, but with a large enough component that is around the tube to help prevent buckling. Of course you can improve upon this by using different angles and weaving patterns in different layers. For example the low angle winding on the inside and a higher angle winding in the outside to keep the inner layers in compression as they try to buckle. Unfortunately, lower angle winding is more difficult and expensive (either very long mandrels or more waste at the end). In the meantime I plan to use convolute wound tubing. If I decide to really push the envelope I may add a layer of woven sleeve to get the fibers running at an angle to axis around 30 - 45 degrees. Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 12:22 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers I have seen FWFG fail on a lot less oomph than these motors pu tout. I think the nature of the material means that a small flaw can have a disproportionate result under the stresses we tend to put on the material. The failures I have seen tend to look like the tube sort of unwound. I am no engineer (and don't even play at being one) but I wonder if the stuff is as strong as it should be in the direction of thrust. -----Original Message----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2009 09:08 AM To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers That's what I was afraid of. I was concerned that my 3" Extreme tubing would meet a similar fate after talking to Al Goncalves, who has shredded the HM Extreme tubing on minimum diameter M's. I don't know how Jack Caynon's held together, but it was not minimum diameter either. Looks like I'm stripping some paint and adding some carbon sleeve. If you shredded it on OS propellant, I've got problems. Mike F. In a message dated 10/6/2009 8:58:39 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes:Alan @ Hawk Mountain touts his "extreme" 98mm FWFG as N-Class capable - as it seems I either ended up with a defect / bad batch or this stuff is over-rated. I plan to CFD analyze this off-season as an exercise to step up my game plan for next year's project - I've got the motor thing down, just need to get the airframe construction on par. /Steve_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From greg at bigredbee.com Tue Oct 6 20:08:15 2009 From: greg at bigredbee.com (Greg Clark) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 20:08:15 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] U4EA Video from XPRS 2009 In-Reply-To: <6bc920e40910061835w12582c75s927483f63f872786@mail.gmail.com> References: <6bc920e40910061835w12582c75s927483f63f872786@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: so just exactly how big WAS that parachute? On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 6:35 PM, Dave Randall wrote: > I posted the in-rocket video of U4EA on youtube. > > Link here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUMVKWMMsiE > > Enjoy! > > -- > - Dave > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From sutchek at sbcglobal.net Tue Oct 6 20:36:07 2009 From: sutchek at sbcglobal.net (The Sutchek's) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 20:36:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: <62330.7462.qm@web82003.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , ? ?What type of load are all of you talking about? ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ???? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not see the staging happen ?? There seemed to be enough people risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% ?blanket clouds , that I didn't need to. ? There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! ? Thoughts anyone ?? I am a life long builder , and so when I started building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT . ? I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's and day's of CATO's and SHREDS,? and chears from the flight line...after the launches lot's and lots of beer.... ? Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need to try it , just to find out if it can be done ? BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible as they used to be. R and D is king , testing , testing testing... ? of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, ? -Paul ? From ds at pacificrocketry.com Tue Oct 6 21:02:04 2009 From: ds at pacificrocketry.com (Denny Smith) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 21:02:04 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <62330.7462.qm@web82003.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <62330.7462.qm@web82003.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002501ca4702$ee307420$ca915c60$@com> Perhaps you should write a book and clue us all in on how to build rockets that don't "shred". -Denny -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of The Sutchek's Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , ? ?What type of load are all of you talking about? ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ???? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not see the staging happen ?? There seemed to be enough people risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% ?blanket clouds , that I didn't need to. ? There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! ? Thoughts anyone ?? I am a life long builder , and so when I started building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT . ? I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's and day's of CATO's and SHREDS,? and chears from the flight line...after the launches lot's and lots of beer.... ? Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need to try it , just to find out if it can be done ? BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible as they used to be. R and D is king , testing , testing testing... ? of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, ? -Paul ? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From scott at scottsrockets.com Tue Oct 6 21:06:12 2009 From: scott at scottsrockets.com (Scott T Bowers) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 21:06:12 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <002501ca4702$ee307420$ca915c60$@com> References: <62330.7462.qm@web82003.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <002501ca4702$ee307420$ca915c60$@com> Message-ID: Simple, over build and under power. Makes for easy recovery too, lands right next to the pad. Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Denny Smith Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 9:02 PM To: 'The Sutchek's'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Perhaps you should write a book and clue us all in on how to build rockets that don't "shred". -Denny -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of The Sutchek's Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , ? ?What type of load are all of you talking about? ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ???? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not see the staging happen ?? There seemed to be enough people risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% ?blanket clouds , that I didn't need to. ? There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! ? Thoughts anyone ?? I am a life long builder , and so when I started building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT . ? I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's and day's of CATO's and SHREDS,? and chears from the flight line...after the launches lot's and lots of beer.... ? Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need to try it , just to find out if it can be done ? BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible as they used to be. R and D is king , testing , testing testing... ? of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, ? -Paul ? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Mfreptiles at aol.com Tue Oct 6 21:20:23 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 00:20:23 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: I've had my share of shreds, but my flights are usually not typical thrust levels, so I'm prepared for the possibility that any composite used could fail. The only material that has guaranteed to be shred proof for some of my flights has been aluminum. It is very hard to design a motor to push a HPR over 200 g's, even more difficult to get it to hold together without going to metal airframes. The stresses are similar to forces imparted to artillery, and in some cases higher. If your rockets can be fired from a barrel of a large artillery gun and survive, that is what it takes to survive 150+ g's. My latest concern is for composite airframe materials that are advertised as N capable failing under mid thrust M's. That is not builder error. Lest we forget, R&D is happening at BALLS, that's what the event is about. The failure rate is expected to be much higher there than at a typical launch. Mike F. In a message dated 10/6/2009 8:36:43 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , What type of load are all of you talking about ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ??? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not see the staging happen ? There seemed to be enough people risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% blanket clouds , that I didn't need to. There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! Thoughts anyone ? I am a life long builder , and so when I started building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT . I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's and day's of CATO's and SHREDS, and chears from the flight line...after the launches lot's and lots of beer.... Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need to try it , just to find out if it can be done BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible as they used to be. R and D is king , testing , testing testing... of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, -Paul _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Tue Oct 6 21:21:14 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:14 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] U4EA Video from XPRS 2009 Message-ID: Just a LITTLE rotation... -----Original Message----- From: Dave Randall [mailto:dmrandall at gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2009 06:35 PM To: 'Rockets NW list', 'mikeandkimwyvel', 'Scott Berfield', 'Michael Dennis' Subject: U4EA Video from XPRS 2009 I posted the in-rocket video of U4EA on youtube. Link here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUMVKWMMsiE Enjoy! -- - Dave From sb at berfield.com Tue Oct 6 21:27:03 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:27:03 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] U4EA Video from XPRS 2009 Message-ID: 1 20', 1 14', and 1 12' -----Original Message----- From: Greg Clark [mailto:greg at bigredbee.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2009 08:08 PM To: 'Dave Randall' Cc: 'Rockets NW list', 'mikeandkimwyvel', 'Scott Berfield', 'Michael Dennis' Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] U4EA Video from XPRS 2009 so just exactly how big WAS that parachute? On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 6:35 PM, Dave Randall wrote: I posted the in-rocket video of U4EA on youtube. Link here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUMVKWMMsiE Enjoy! -- - Dave _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Tue Oct 6 21:57:20 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:57:20 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] U4EA launch video Message-ID: I have uploaded some video and stills of the U4EA from XPRS to YouTube. Didn't manage to catch the initial ignition for launch 2 :( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIQTN0fDQFE From bradwr at wrightholdings.com Tue Oct 6 22:00:28 2009 From: bradwr at wrightholdings.com (Brad Wright) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 05:00:28 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] U4EA Video from XPRS 2009 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3A117F0D50887C4EAA3B35717ADE209914EF0857@BL2PRD0102MB003.prod.exchangelabs.com> nice spin. is this with the EX motor or commercial? -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 9:21 PM To: Dave Randall; Rockets NW list; mikeandkimwyvel; Scott Berfield; Michael Dennis Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] U4EA Video from XPRS 2009 Just a LITTLE rotation... -----Original Message----- From: Dave Randall [mailto:dmrandall at gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2009 06:35 PM To: 'Rockets NW list', 'mikeandkimwyvel', 'Scott Berfield', 'Michael Dennis' Subject: U4EA Video from XPRS 2009 I posted the in-rocket video of U4EA on youtube. Link here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUMVKWMMsiE Enjoy! -- - Dave _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Tue Oct 6 23:04:27 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (Steve Cutonilli) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 23:04:27 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers In-Reply-To: <00a601ca46ef$56580ea0$03082be0$@net> Message-ID: Wow - thanks Marty. I always gave HM tubing an advantage in terms of epoxy stiffness vs. Curtis's G10 convolute equivalent because of the post-cure processing used - mil spec? If one has a sample of both then give it a flick of the finger and listen to what I mean. Not saying this is a correct interpretation - just the gage used. I've seen the convolute wound G10 tubing shatter along the axis and not sure if this is any better particularly for inter-stage coupling applications where I have direct evidence that FWFG seems to work out better. I like the Jopson tubing seen at your dawg kennel - convolute wound 5.7oz CF twill - if felt strong and looked fantastic - it was made with high-temp epoxy - I was impressed. Curtis uses some pretty nice FWCF tubing on the Mongoose series of kits - the tow bundles on the 98mm are grouped like you describe Marty - I will send you a close-up picture for comment off-line if you don't mind. Over engineering is costly and sometimes the best solution make no bones about it. For re-use rocketry applications composites is the only way to go - aluminum airframes will always be too heavy or single use because it gets out of round easily - I'm settled to cough-up the chilla for CF moving forward on N class or better. Thanks again Marty. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Marty Weiser [mailto:MartyWeiser at comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 6:42 PM To: 'Scott Berfield'; Mfreptiles at aol.com; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers Filament wound tube can take the stresses we apply during high performance flights, but based upon the broken piece of Hawk Mountain tube I have I don't believe it is designed for what we do to it. I have a piece of 4" tube that is about 3 years old that I shredded at BALLS in 2007 (the G10 fin also delaminated during that flight). The tube is wound at about a 70 degree angle from the axis and uses a fairly small number of layers of a fairly large tow (about 0.100" wide by 0.010 - 0.015" thick). In addition, it appears that the tows in opposite directions are not woven together very often if at all (I should dissolve the epoxy from a section and take a look sometime). For body tube I would like to see the winding done at an angle of 20 - 40 degrees from the axis using a smaller tow that is woven together fairly frequently - about every 4 tows seems right. This will orient the fibers primarily along the axis, but with a large enough component that is around the tube to help prevent buckling. Of course you can improve upon this by using different angles and weaving patterns in different layers. For example the low angle winding on the inside and a higher angle winding in the outside to keep the inner layers in compression as they try to buckle. Unfortunately, lower angle winding is more difficult and expensive (either very long mandrels or more waste at the end). In the meantime I plan to use convolute wound tubing. If I decide to really push the envelope I may add a layer of woven sleeve to get the fibers running at an angle to axis around 30 - 45 degrees. Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 12:22 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers I have seen FWFG fail on a lot less oomph than these motors pu tout. I think the nature of the material means that a small flaw can have a disproportionate result under the stresses we tend to put on the material. The failures I have seen tend to look like the tube sort of unwound. I am no engineer (and don't even play at being one) but I wonder if the stuff is as strong as it should be in the direction of thrust. -----Original Message----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2009 09:08 AM To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers That's what I was afraid of. I was concerned that my 3" Extreme tubing would meet a similar fate after talking to Al Goncalves, who has shredded the HM Extreme tubing on minimum diameter M's. I don't know how Jack Caynon's held together, but it was not minimum diameter either. Looks like I'm stripping some paint and adding some carbon sleeve. If you shredded it on OS propellant, I've got problems. Mike F. In a message dated 10/6/2009 8:58:39 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes:Alan @ Hawk Mountain touts his "extreme" 98mm FWFG as N-Class capable - as it seems I either ended up with a defect / bad batch or this stuff is over-rated. I plan to CFD analyze this off-season as an exercise to step up my game plan for next year's project - I've got the motor thing down, just need to get the airframe construction on par. /Steve_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rocke ts _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Tue Oct 6 23:52:13 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 23:52:13 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] U4EA Video from XPRS 2009 In-Reply-To: <3A117F0D50887C4EAA3B35717ADE209914EF0857@BL2PRD0102MB003.prod.exchangelabs.com> References: <3A117F0D50887C4EAA3B35717ADE209914EF0857@BL2PRD0102MB003.prod.exchangelabs.com> Message-ID: <000601ca471a$b40049c0$1c00dd40$@com> I think that was the EX day. So we had your N in the center along with two K1100s and 2 J-somethings. Lit them all on the ground with thermite. -----Original Message----- From: Brad Wright [mailto:bradwr at wrightholdings.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 10:00 PM To: Scott Berfield; Dave Randall; Rockets NW list; mikeandkimwyvel; Michael Dennis Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] U4EA Video from XPRS 2009 nice spin. is this with the EX motor or commercial? -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 9:21 PM To: Dave Randall; Rockets NW list; mikeandkimwyvel; Scott Berfield; Michael Dennis Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] U4EA Video from XPRS 2009 Just a LITTLE rotation... -----Original Message----- From: Dave Randall [mailto:dmrandall at gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2009 06:35 PM To: 'Rockets NW list', 'mikeandkimwyvel', 'Scott Berfield', 'Michael Dennis' Subject: U4EA Video from XPRS 2009 I posted the in-rocket video of U4EA on youtube. Link here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUMVKWMMsiE Enjoy! -- - Dave _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Wed Oct 7 02:09:04 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 02:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <62330.7462.qm@web82003.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <62330.7462.qm@web82003.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: They're not professional mechanical engineers(in some cases never even took a physics course), they're using materials that aren't well characterized, don't have software to analyze the stresses, and build extreme power rockets like scaled-up model rockets. No surprise that failures predominate. Paul, you know that success in rocketry is achieved by leaving nothing to chance. But hey, how many hobby rocketeers *are* professional engineers, have the expensive software, detailed info on the materials etc? BALLS is a place where people can go roll the dice and hope for success. That's a good thing IMO. Me, I don't have the disposable income to trash very many Estes rockets much less FAA class 3 stuff. It would be nice if the failure rate at BALLS could at least be defended to skeptics though. Perhaps a bit less beer and haute cuisine, a little more focus on the important little rocket details... I've never been to a BALLS launch, sounds more like rocketeers' version of Burning Man than the kind of serious intent launch I'd prefer. But hey, now I'm in (economically forced) retirement and don't have to pass random drug tests, maybe I'll get to Burning Man someday. Sniff the wafting aroma, hang out around the naked women... :) Guess I'm just an old fogey who likes his rockets and partying at different venues. Except on New Year's eve. Heh heh. +McG+ > Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , > ? > ?What type of load are all of you talking about? ? , what area of g forces > + or - ,,, ???? and more importantly what motor classes with such > airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to > high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the > wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to > launch and not see the staging happen ?? There seemed to be enough people > risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% ?blanket clouds , that I > didn't need to. > ? > There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " > that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! > ? > Thoughts anyone ?? I am a life long builder , and so when I started > building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I > see it , it's NOT . > ? > I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's > and day's of CATO's and SHREDS,? and chears from the flight line...after > the launches lot's and lots of beer.... > ? > Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need > to try it , just to find out if it can be done > ? > BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible > as they used to be. > R and D is king , testing , testing testing... > ? > of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, > ? > -Paul > ? > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From raystoner99 at comcast.net Wed Oct 7 07:16:53 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (W. Raymond Stoner) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 07:16:53 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <62330.7462.qm@web82003.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <62330.7462.qm@web82003.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003701ca4758$d2b34aa0$7819dfe0$@net> Sounds like a gauntlet has been thrown. You build it, we'll shred it! Conditions of the game; Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. Build using your "standard" unshredable technique. We'll provide the motor. You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. You must fly in your certification level. I'm game are you? Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of The Sutchek's Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , ? ?What type of load are all of you talking about? ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ???? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not see the staging happen ?? There seemed to be enough people risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% ?blanket clouds , that I didn't need to. ? There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! ? Thoughts anyone ?? I am a life long builder , and so when I started building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT . ? I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's and day's of CATO's and SHREDS,? and chears from the flight line...after the launches lot's and lots of beer.... ? Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need to try it , just to find out if it can be done ? BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible as they used to be. R and D is king , testing , testing testing... ? of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, ? -Paul ? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From tnetcenter at gmail.com Wed Oct 7 07:33:35 2009 From: tnetcenter at gmail.com (Jeff Moore) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 07:33:35 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust References: <62330.7462.qm@web82003.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <003701ca4758$d2b34aa0$7819dfe0$@net> Message-ID: <8E7B45A6236D4EE091FB9F858522914E@TNTCENTER> Is there a "no CATO - full replacement guarantee" on that gauntlet? Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: "W. Raymond Stoner" Sounds like a gauntlet has been thrown. You build it, we'll shred it! Conditions of the game; Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. Build using your "standard" unshredable technique. We'll provide the motor. You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. You must fly in your certification level. I'm game are you? Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of The Sutchek's Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , What type of load are all of you talking about ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ??? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not see the staging happen ? There seemed to be enough people risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% blanket clouds , that I didn't need to. There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! Thoughts anyone ? I am a life long builder , and so when I started building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT . I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's and day's of CATO's and SHREDS, and chears from the flight line...after the launches lot's and lots of beer.... Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need to try it , just to find out if it can be done BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible as they used to be. R and D is king , testing , testing testing... of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, -Paul _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From MartyWeiser at comcast.net Wed Oct 7 08:53:38 2009 From: MartyWeiser at comcast.net (Marty Weiser) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:53:38 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers In-Reply-To: References: <00a601ca46ef$56580ea0$03082be0$@net> Message-ID: <005a01ca4766$56e05860$04a10920$@net> Steve, I am have seen the same failure mode in Performance Rocketry convolute tube. In fact the top couple of inches of my 54 mm sustainer that CATOed at the top was fractured both vertically and horizontally. Any time you have a material with a strong orientation it will tend to fracture along the lines of weakness. In this case between the parallel tows used to make the fabric. I have not looked at the tube in great detail, but am guessing that that it is plain weave so the tows have a fair bit of bend as they go over and under alternate tows in the opposite direction since the tubes are made from many layers of thin fabric. A 2x2 or 4x4 twill weave will have less bending and should be less prone to that failure mode. This is also why I like the idea of using a braided sleeve over convolute tube - you add strength in other orientations. For our applications we have to balance stiffness and toughness of the tube. We want a stiff tube that does not flex under flight stresses, particularly when we get an off axis stress like weather cocking. However, we also need a tough tube that does not fracture when it is deformed, particularly when there are stress risers like screw holes in the tube. The finger flick test probably tells us more about the hardness and density of the tube than anything else - I would expect a harder tube to be stiffer and less tough than one that is a bit softer. I believe that in a composite airframe we should get the stiffness from the fibers (carbon and s-glass are better than Kevlar and e-glass) and the toughness from the matrix (Kevlar can also contribute greatly to toughness if applied correctly). Unfortunately, most epoxies are fairly brittle which does not give us much matrix toughness. The use of an aluminum airframe avoids the inherent lack of toughness of an epoxy matrix composite with most grades of aluminum alloys. However, the trade off is that they are not as stiff and can be deformed out of round by moderate side loads. Most aluminum alloys are also denser than the composites so the airframe may weigh more to get the same stiffness. Once again we are dealing with trade offs. Marty -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 11:04 PM To: 'Marty Weiser'; 'Scott Berfield'; Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers Wow - thanks Marty. I always gave HM tubing an advantage in terms of epoxy stiffness vs. Curtis's G10 convolute equivalent because of the post-cure processing used - mil spec? If one has a sample of both then give it a flick of the finger and listen to what I mean. Not saying this is a correct interpretation - just the gage used. I've seen the convolute wound G10 tubing shatter along the axis and not sure if this is any better particularly for inter-stage coupling applications where I have direct evidence that FWFG seems to work out better. I like the Jopson tubing seen at your dawg kennel - convolute wound 5.7oz CF twill - if felt strong and looked fantastic - it was made with high-temp epoxy - I was impressed. Curtis uses some pretty nice FWCF tubing on the Mongoose series of kits - the tow bundles on the 98mm are grouped like you describe Marty - I will send you a close-up picture for comment off-line if you don't mind. Over engineering is costly and sometimes the best solution make no bones about it. For re-use rocketry applications composites is the only way to go - aluminum airframes will always be too heavy or single use because it gets out of round easily - I'm settled to cough-up the chilla for CF moving forward on N class or better. Thanks again Marty. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Marty Weiser [mailto:MartyWeiser at comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 6:42 PM To: 'Scott Berfield'; Mfreptiles at aol.com; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers Filament wound tube can take the stresses we apply during high performance flights, but based upon the broken piece of Hawk Mountain tube I have I don't believe it is designed for what we do to it. I have a piece of 4" tube that is about 3 years old that I shredded at BALLS in 2007 (the G10 fin also delaminated during that flight). The tube is wound at about a 70 degree angle from the axis and uses a fairly small number of layers of a fairly large tow (about 0.100" wide by 0.010 - 0.015" thick). In addition, it appears that the tows in opposite directions are not woven together very often if at all (I should dissolve the epoxy from a section and take a look sometime). For body tube I would like to see the winding done at an angle of 20 - 40 degrees from the axis using a smaller tow that is woven together fairly frequently - about every 4 tows seems right. This will orient the fibers primarily along the axis, but with a large enough component that is around the tube to help prevent buckling. Of course you can improve upon this by using different angles and weaving patterns in different layers. For example the low angle winding on the inside and a higher angle winding in the outside to keep the inner layers in compression as they try to buckle. Unfortunately, lower angle winding is more difficult and expensive (either very long mandrels or more waste at the end). In the meantime I plan to use convolute wound tubing. If I decide to really push the envelope I may add a layer of woven sleeve to get the fibers running at an angle to axis around 30 - 45 degrees. Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 12:22 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers I have seen FWFG fail on a lot less oomph than these motors pu tout. I think the nature of the material means that a small flaw can have a disproportionate result under the stresses we tend to put on the material. The failures I have seen tend to look like the tube sort of unwound. I am no engineer (and don't even play at being one) but I wonder if the stuff is as strong as it should be in the direction of thrust. -----Original Message----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2009 09:08 AM To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers That's what I was afraid of. I was concerned that my 3" Extreme tubing would meet a similar fate after talking to Al Goncalves, who has shredded the HM Extreme tubing on minimum diameter M's. I don't know how Jack Caynon's held together, but it was not minimum diameter either. Looks like I'm stripping some paint and adding some carbon sleeve. If you shredded it on OS propellant, I've got problems. Mike F. In a message dated 10/6/2009 8:58:39 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes:Alan @ Hawk Mountain touts his "extreme" 98mm FWFG as N-Class capable - as it seems I either ended up with a defect / bad batch or this stuff is over-rated. I plan to CFD analyze this off-season as an exercise to step up my game plan for next year's project - I've got the motor thing down, just need to get the airframe construction on par. /Steve_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rocke ts _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From adrian.l.carbine at gmail.com Wed Oct 7 09:50:21 2009 From: adrian.l.carbine at gmail.com (Adrian L Carbine) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 09:50:21 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers In-Reply-To: <005a01ca4766$56e05860$04a10920$@net> References: <00a601ca46ef$56580ea0$03082be0$@net> <005a01ca4766$56e05860$04a10920$@net> Message-ID: What Marty is suggesting is exactly what I did on my min-dia 3-stage, which is obviously worst-case for tube flex. Before I designed my 2-stage N-to-N rocket, I experimented with different kinds of tubing and and found that Hawk Mtn spiral-wound FG tubes flexed a lot, even when laminated with CF braid. I ended up going with Curtis' FG tubing laminated with CF braid, and that hardly flexes at all. Since the resulting airframe has fibers oriented in axial and off-axial directions it is much stronger for static and dynamic loading. I cannot measure the dynamic stress during flight, but it can easily be checked statically: I can support my 3-stage rocket at each end and sit in the middle and bounce, and it only flexes a few inches over a 20-ft span. This rigidity is less important for single-stage rockets, but for my 3-stage design it is critical. When laminated correctly the extra CF braid layer doesn't add a huge amount of weight (although _any_ additional weight decreases velocity), but since I don't care as much about top speed for this project, the main cost for me is just the "excess effort" required. I just picked up a couple of PR Mongoose CF kits (75mm and 38mm) at the launch on Saturday and I'm looking forward to using the tubes to further explore the structural capabilities of wide-tow CF. :-) Probably nothing like what MikeF does to his airframes, you understand, but fun nonetheless :-) The Mongoose-75 came with a Von Karman nose cone, which I'm looking forward to trying as well. My biggest gripe about designing my own airframes is the lack of good+inexpensive static/dynamic structural analysis tools. We're forced to just try it out and see if it fails. Several of the airframe failures at Balls '09 were of this variety -- expanding the body of knowlege about where the failure points are, by trying something new at higher levels of impulse. My thanks and condolences to everybody who added to this understanding last week, not to mention the entertainment value. Personally I tend to over-design at first (guilty as-charged) and then back it off on subsequent airframes as I learn more, while others like to more aggressively start with under-design and beef it up over multiple attempts. The only disadvantage in my approach is that I end up with a shop full of rockets and questions from my wife about why I need more rockets! --- Adrian On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Marty Weiser wrote: > Steve, > > I am have seen the same failure mode in Performance Rocketry convolute > tube. > In fact the top couple of inches of my 54 mm sustainer that CATOed at the > top was fractured both vertically and horizontally. Any time you have a > material with a strong orientation it will tend to fracture along the lines > of weakness. In this case between the parallel tows used to make the > fabric. I have not looked at the tube in great detail, but am guessing > that > that it is plain weave so the tows have a fair bit of bend as they go over > and under alternate tows in the opposite direction since the tubes are made > from many layers of thin fabric. A 2x2 or 4x4 twill weave will have less > bending and should be less prone to that failure mode. This is also why I > like the idea of using a braided sleeve over convolute tube - you add > strength in other orientations. > > For our applications we have to balance stiffness and toughness of the > tube. > We want a stiff tube that does not flex under flight stresses, particularly > when we get an off axis stress like weather cocking. However, we also need > a tough tube that does not fracture when it is deformed, particularly when > there are stress risers like screw holes in the tube. The finger flick > test > probably tells us more about the hardness and density of the tube than > anything else - I would expect a harder tube to be stiffer and less tough > than one that is a bit softer. I believe that in a composite airframe we > should get the stiffness from the fibers (carbon and s-glass are better > than > Kevlar and e-glass) and the toughness from the matrix (Kevlar can also > contribute greatly to toughness if applied correctly). Unfortunately, most > epoxies are fairly brittle which does not give us much matrix toughness. > > The use of an aluminum airframe avoids the inherent lack of toughness of an > epoxy matrix composite with most grades of aluminum alloys. However, the > trade off is that they are not as stiff and can be deformed out of round by > moderate side loads. Most aluminum alloys are also denser than the > composites so the airframe may weigh more to get the same stiffness. Once > again we are dealing with trade offs. > > Marty > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 11:04 PM > To: 'Marty Weiser'; 'Scott Berfield'; Mfreptiles at aol.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers > > Wow - thanks Marty. > > I always gave HM tubing an advantage in terms of epoxy stiffness vs. > Curtis's G10 convolute equivalent because of the post-cure processing > used - mil spec? If one has a sample of both then give it a flick of > the finger and listen to what I mean. Not saying this is a correct > interpretation - just the gage used. > > I've seen the convolute wound G10 tubing shatter along the axis and not > sure if this is any better particularly for inter-stage coupling > applications where I have direct evidence that FWFG seems to work out > better. > > I like the Jopson tubing seen at your dawg kennel - convolute wound > 5.7oz CF twill - if felt strong and looked fantastic - it was made with > high-temp epoxy - I was impressed. > > Curtis uses some pretty nice FWCF tubing on the Mongoose series of kits > - the tow bundles on the 98mm are grouped like you describe Marty - I > will send you a close-up picture for comment off-line if you don't mind. > > Over engineering is costly and sometimes the best solution make no bones > about it. For re-use rocketry applications composites is the only way > to go - aluminum airframes will always be too heavy or single use > because it gets out of round easily - I'm settled to cough-up the chilla > for CF moving forward on N class or better. > > Thanks again Marty. > > /Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Marty Weiser [mailto:MartyWeiser at comcast.net] > Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 6:42 PM > To: 'Scott Berfield'; Mfreptiles at aol.com; steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers > > Filament wound tube can take the stresses we apply during high > performance > flights, but based upon the broken piece of Hawk Mountain tube I have I > don't believe it is designed for what we do to it. I have a piece of 4" > tube that is about 3 years old that I shredded at BALLS in 2007 (the G10 > fin > also delaminated during that flight). The tube is wound at about a 70 > degree angle from the axis and uses a fairly small number of layers of a > fairly large tow (about 0.100" wide by 0.010 - 0.015" thick). In > addition, > it appears that the tows in opposite directions are not woven together > very > often if at all (I should dissolve the epoxy from a section and take a > look > sometime). > > For body tube I would like to see the winding done at an angle of 20 - > 40 > degrees from the axis using a smaller tow that is woven together fairly > frequently - about every 4 tows seems right. This will orient the > fibers > primarily along the axis, but with a large enough component that is > around > the tube to help prevent buckling. Of course you can improve upon this > by > using different angles and weaving patterns in different layers. For > example the low angle winding on the inside and a higher angle winding > in > the outside to keep the inner layers in compression as they try to > buckle. > Unfortunately, lower angle winding is more difficult and expensive > (either > very long mandrels or more waste at the end). > > In the meantime I plan to use convolute wound tubing. If I decide to > really > push the envelope I may add a layer of woven sleeve to get the fibers > running at an angle to axis around 30 - 45 degrees. > > Marty > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com > [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Scott Berfield > Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 12:22 PM > To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers > > I have seen FWFG fail on a lot less oomph than these motors pu tout. I > think > the nature of the material means that a small flaw can have a > disproportionate result under the stresses we tend to put on the > material. > The failures I have seen tend to look like the tube sort of unwound. I > am no > engineer (and don't even play at being one) but I wonder if the stuff is > as > strong as it should be in the direction of thrust. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2009 09:08 AM > To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers > > That's what I was afraid of. I was concerned that my 3" Extreme tubing > would > meet a similar fate after talking to Al Goncalves, who has shredded the > HM > Extreme tubing on minimum diameter M's. I don't know how Jack Caynon's > held > together, but it was not minimum diameter either. Looks like I'm > stripping > some paint and adding some carbon sleeve. If you shredded it on OS > propellant, I've got problems. Mike F. In a message dated 10/6/2009 > 8:58:39 > A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes:Alan @ Hawk > Mountain touts his "extreme" 98mm FWFG as N-Class capable - as it seems > I > either ended up with a defect / bad batch or this stuff is over-rated. I > plan to CFD analyze this off-season as an exercise to step up my game > plan > for next year's project - I've got the motor thing down, just need to > get > the airframe construction on par. > /Steve_______________________________________________Rockets mailing > listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rocke > ts > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From raystoner99 at comcast.net Wed Oct 7 10:26:33 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (raystoner99 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 17:26:33 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <8E7B45A6236D4EE091FB9F858522914E@TNTCENTER> Message-ID: <1368549466.1158521254936393981.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> In short, NO. There are only two kinds of research motors, those that have CATO'd and those that are going to. I *am* willing to static test the motor on the ground and provide pressure data on the design. I'll be suitably aggressive and conservative. My goal in the motor department would be to provide a motor that is a reliable, but also as aggressive as I can make it. I'm not going to just put something together and "test" it in the rocket. It will use a fully characterized propellant with at least one successful static test prior to flight. If its an interesting motor, it may have some flight tests as well. As always in a research environment, the motor is my responsibility, the airframe is his responsibility, electronics, tracking etc. If the motor hardware is *lost* (as in can't be found, but worked fine), I'm on the hook for that as well. Why would I want to replace an "airframe that can't be shredded" if I am able shred it? Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Moore" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 7:33:35 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Is there a "no CATO - full replacement guarantee" on that gauntlet? Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: "W. Raymond Stoner" Sounds like a gauntlet has been thrown. You build it, we'll shred it! Conditions of the game; Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. Build using your "standard" unshredable technique. We'll provide the motor. You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. You must fly in your certification level. I'm game are you? Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of The Sutchek's Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , What type of load are all of you talking about ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ??? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not see the staging happen ? There seemed to be enough people risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% blanket clouds , that I didn't need to. There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! Thoughts anyone ? I am a life long builder , and so when I started building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT . I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's and day's of CATO's and SHREDS, and chears from the flight line...after the launches lot's and lots of beer.... Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need to try it , just to find out if it can be done BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible as they used to be. R and D is king , testing , testing testing... of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, -Paul _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sealtee at cableone.net Wed Oct 7 10:46:10 2009 From: sealtee at cableone.net (Cameron Tinder) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 10:46:10 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: <000901ca4776$0eb0c7e0$2c1257a0$@net> Hey Ray, Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not limited to: 1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown one that has gone supersonic. ) 2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. 3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. 4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. 5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, so that does not count! 6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. 7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. 8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. 9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. Your rules are: 1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. 2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. 3) We'll provide the motor. 4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. 5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. 6) You must fly in your certification level. I would like to add a few more: 1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging rights that come with this "award"! 2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. 3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. 4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or early summer. 5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until the other can make the winner fail! I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort of thing might be quite fun! Best regard, Cameron From raystoner99 at comcast.net Wed Oct 7 11:23:20 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (raystoner99 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:23:20 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <1866412600.1182131254939689675.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <366452946.1183071254939800701.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> No Cameron, This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT ." I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a special launch for this flight. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cameron Tinder" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... Hey Ray, Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not limited to: 1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown one that has gone supersonic. ) 2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. 3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. 4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. 5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, so that does not count! 6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. 7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. 8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. 9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. Your rules are: 1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. 2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. 3) We'll provide the motor. 4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. 5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. 6) You must fly in your certification level. I would like to add a few more: 1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging rights that come with this ?award?! 2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. 3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. 4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or early summer. 5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until the other can make the winner fail! I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort of thing might be quite fun! Best regard, Cameron From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Wed Oct 7 11:55:58 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (steve-c at ix.netcom.com) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 11:55:58 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: <28527595.1254941758597.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits on casing temperature. /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >To: Cameron Tinder >Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > >No Cameron, > >This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. > >He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT ." > >I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. > >I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a special launch for this flight. > >Ray > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Cameron Tinder" >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... > > > > >Hey Ray, > > > >Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not limited to: > > > >1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown one that has gone supersonic. ) > >2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. > >3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. > >4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. > >5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, so that does not count! > >6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. > >7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. > >8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. > >9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. > > > > > >Your rules are: > > > >1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. > >2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. > >3) We'll provide the motor. > >4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. > >5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. > >6) You must fly in your certification level. > > > >I would like to add a few more: > > > >1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging rights that come with this ?award?! > >2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. > >3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. > >4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or early summer. > >5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until the other can make the winner fail! > > > >I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort of thing might be quite fun! > > > >Best regard, > > > >Cameron > > > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From sb at berfield.com Wed Oct 7 13:01:19 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 13:01:19 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: <200910072000.n97K0bG1015182@omr3.networksolutionsemail.com> My 2 cents for what it is worth... I don't find basic hpr construction too tough, but that's because am not doinng anything too fancy. My most complex rocket so far is a pretty basic 2 stage to 14000 feet. BUT as I go along and start thinking about new things to try, I start thinking about getting higher on a single motor and start running into the stronger, lighter, more thrust tradeoffs. Could I build a bigass heavy bird that wouldn't shred on an O? Probably. Could I build an elegant, minimum material, maximum strength equivalent with zero risk of a failure? No. But it would be fun and educational to try. Clearly, some folks could use more rigor in technique and procedures, but unless you are pushing the edge of what you know, you aren't learning or growing. And as any "real" engineer will tell you, testing and R&D and math and sims only get you so far. Eventually you have to try it for real and reality has a messy tendency to screw with the best laid plans. Do a quick google search on rocket failures and see how failure proof the big boys with their high tech materials, legions of engineers, and unlimited budgets are. Reality may be a bitch, but she's also an amazing teacher. -----Original Message----- From: raystoner99 at comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 11:23 AM To: Cameron Tinder Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... No Cameron, This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT ." I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a special launch for this flight. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cameron Tinder" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... Hey Ray, Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not limited to: 1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown one that has gone supersonic. ) 2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. 3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. 4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. 5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, so that does not count! 6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. 7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. 8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. 9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. Your rules are: 1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. 2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. 3) We'll provide the motor. 4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. 5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. 6) You must fly in your certification level. I would like to add a few more: 1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging rights that come with this ?award?! 2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. 3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. 4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or early summer. 5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until the other can make the winner fail! I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort of thing might be quite fun! Best regard, Cameron _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From scott at scottsrockets.com Wed Oct 7 14:07:47 2009 From: scott at scottsrockets.com (Scott T Bowers) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 14:07:47 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <366452946.1183071254939800701.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> References: <1866412600.1182131254939689675.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> <366452946.1183071254939800701.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: Well, I envision the rocket builder showing up with a 98mm rocket weighing 45lbs with ten layers of carbon.... Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of raystoner99 at comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 11:23 AM To: Cameron Tinder Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... No Cameron, This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT ." I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a special launch for this flight. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cameron Tinder" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... Hey Ray, Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not limited to: 1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown one that has gone supersonic. ) 2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. 3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. 4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. 5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, so that does not count! 6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. 7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. 8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. 9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. Your rules are: 1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. 2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. 3) We'll provide the motor. 4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. 5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. 6) You must fly in your certification level. I would like to add a few more: 1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging rights that come with this "award"! 2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. 3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. 4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or early summer. 5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until the other can make the winner fail! I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort of thing might be quite fun! Best regard, Cameron _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Mfreptiles at aol.com Wed Oct 7 15:17:27 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:17:27 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: The rocket I built has a guarantee from the manufacturer not to shred. It is an Ultimate Wildman. Unfortunately, it is made from the HM Extreme tubing, which has now been proven to fail under less than extreme loading. If I shred it, I get a free replacement of the rocket, however it does not cover electronics, build time, torn up recovery components, propellant cost, etc. etc. As much as I would like to prove to Wildman that their kit can be shredded, I don't like making a rocket fail on purpose. I'm now glad that I didn't make it to BALLS, because the airframe would have failed on my coaxial project. I'll be stripping paint and ordering some CF sleeve over the coming weeks. Thanks Steve and everybody else who sacrificed a rocket for everyone to learn from. Mike F. From Mfreptiles at aol.com Wed Oct 7 15:20:21 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:20:21 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: I've got a 54mm M that should test the build skills of the most competent builder. Even Triano might have a hard time with that one. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 7:34:37 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tnetcenter at gmail.com writes: ----- Original Message ----- From: "W. Raymond Stoner" Sounds like a gauntlet has been thrown. You build it, we'll shred it! Conditions of the game; Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. Build using your "standard" unshredable technique. We'll provide the motor. You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. You must fly in your certification level. I'm game are you? Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of The Sutchek's Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , What type of load are all of you talking about ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ??? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not see the staging happen ? There seemed to be enough people risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% blanket clouds , that I didn't need to. There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! Thoughts anyone ? I am a life long builder , and so when I started building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT . I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's and day's of CATO's and SHREDS, and chears from the flight line...after the launches lot's and lots of beer.... Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need to try it , just to find out if it can be done BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible as they used to be. R and D is king , testing , testing testing... of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, -Paul _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From raystoner99 at comcast.net Wed Oct 7 15:50:17 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (raystoner99 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 22:50:17 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <559908479.1300261254955304986.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <181247052.1303801254955817114.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> I bow to the master! If you'd like to provide the motor, I'd certainly be willing to step aside. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 3:20:21 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust I've got a 54mm M that should test the build skills of the most competent builder. Even Triano might have a hard time with that one. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 7:34:37 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tnetcenter at gmail.com writes: ----- Original Message ----- From: "W. Raymond Stoner" Sounds like a gauntlet has been thrown. You build it, we'll shred it! Conditions of the game; Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. Build using your "standard" unshredable technique. We'll provide the motor. You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. You must fly in your certification level. I'm game are you? Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of The Sutchek's Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , What type of load are all of you talking about ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ??? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not see the staging happen ? There seemed to be enough people risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% blanket clouds , that I didn't need to. There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! Thoughts anyone ? I am a life long builder , and so when I started building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT . I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's and day's of CATO's and SHREDS, and chears from the flight line...after the launches lot's and lots of beer.... Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need to try it , just to find out if it can be done BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible as they used to be. R and D is king , testing , testing testing... of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, -Paul _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Wed Oct 7 16:12:35 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 23:12:35 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers Message-ID: That really was a beautiful flight - and an awesome project overall. -----Original Message----- From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:21 AM To: 'Adrian L Carbine', 'Marty Weiser' Cc: 'Steve Cutonilli', 'Scott Berfield', Mfreptiles at aol.com, rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers body{font-family: Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-color: #ffffff;color: black;}p{margin:0px}I was in awe watching Triple-Threat on boost - none of the bending I've experienced with moderate L/D ratios compared to yours Adrian. Brilliant execution and now we know why. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Adrian L Carbine Sent: Oct 7, 2009 9:50 AM To: Marty Weiser Cc: Steve Cutonilli , Scott Berfield , Mfreptiles at aol.com, rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers What Marty is suggesting is exactly what I did on my min-dia 3-stage, which is obviously worst-case for tube flex. Before I designed my 2-stage N-to-N rocket, I experimented with different kinds of tubing and and found that Hawk Mtn spiral-wound FG tubes flexed a lot, even when laminated with CF braid. I ended up going with Curtis' FG tubing laminated with CF braid, and that hardly flexes at all. Since the resulting airframe has fibers oriented in axial and off-axial directions it is much stronger for static and dynamic loading. I cannot measure the dynamic stress during flight, but it can easily be checked statically: I can support my 3-stage rocket at each end and sit in the middle and bounce, and it only flexes a few inches over a 20-ft span. This rigidity is less important for single-stage rockets, but for my 3-stage design it is critical. When laminated correctly the extra CF braid layer doesn't add a huge amount of weight (although _any_ additional weight decreases velocity), but since I don't care as much about top speed for this project, the main cost for me is just the "excess effort" required. I just picked up a couple of PR Mongoose CF kits (75mm and 38mm) at the launch on Saturday and I'm looking forward to using the tubes to further explore the structural capabilities of wide-tow CF. :-) Probably nothing like what MikeF does to his airframes, you understand, but fun nonetheless :-) The Mongoose-75 came with a Von Karman nose cone, which I'm looking forward to trying as well. My biggest gripe about designing my own airframes is the lack of good+inexpensive static/dynamic structural analysis tools. We're forced to just try it out and see if it fails. Several of the airframe failures at Balls '09 were of this variety -- expanding the body of knowlege about where the failure points are, by trying something new at higher levels of impulse. My thanks and condolences to everybody who added to this understanding last week, not to mention the entertainment value. Personally I tend to over-design at first (guilty as-charged) and then back it off on subsequent airframes as I learn more, while others like to more aggressively start with under-design and beef it up over multiple attempts. The only disadvantage in my approach is that I end up with a shop full of rockets and questions from my wife about why I need more rockets! --- Adrian On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Marty Weiser wrote: Steve, I am have seen the same failure mode in Performance Rocketry convolute tube. In fact the top couple of inches of my 54 mm sustainer that CATOed at the top was fractured both vertically and horizontally. Any time you have a material with a strong orientation it will tend to fracture along the lines of weakness. In this case between the parallel tows used to make the fabric. I have not looked at the tube in great detail, but am guessing that that it is plain weave so the tows have a fair bit of bend as they go over and under alternate tows in the opposite direction since the tubes are made from many layers of thin fabric. A 2x2 or 4x4 twill weave will have less bending and should be less prone to that failure mode. This is also why I like the idea of using a braided sleeve over convolute tube - you add strength in other orientations. For our applications we have to balance stiffness and toughness of the tube. We want a stiff tube that does not flex under flight stresses, particularly when we get an off axis stress like weather cocking. However, we also need a tough tube that does not fracture when it is deformed, particularly when there are stress risers like screw holes in the tube. The finger flick test probably tells us more about the hardness and density of the tube than anything else - I would expect a harder tube to be stiffer and less tough than one that is a bit softer. I believe that in a composite airframe we should get the stiffness from the fibers (carbon and s-glass are better than Kevlar and e-glass) and the toughness from the matrix (Kevlar can also contribute greatly to toughness if applied correctly). Unfortunately, most epoxies are fairly brittle which does not give us much matrix toughness. The use of an aluminum airframe avoids the inherent lack of toughness of an epoxy matrix composite with most grades of aluminum alloys. However, the trade off is that they are not as stiff and can be deformed out of round by moderate side loads. Most aluminum alloys are also denser than the composites so the airframe may weigh more to get the same stiffness. Once again we are dealing with trade offs. Marty -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 11:04 PM To: 'Marty Weiser'; 'Scott Berfield'; Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers Wow - thanks Marty. I always gave HM tubing an advantage in terms of epoxy stiffness vs. Curtis's G10 convolute equivalent because of the post-cure processing used - mil spec? If one has a sample of both then give it a flick of the finger and listen to what I mean. Not saying this is a correct interpretation - just the gage used. I've seen the convolute wound G10 tubing shatter along the axis and not sure if this is any better particularly for inter-stage coupling applications where I have direct evidence that FWFG seems to work out better. I like the Jopson tubing seen at your dawg kennel - convolute wound 5.7oz CF twill - if felt strong and looked fantastic - it was made with high-temp epoxy - I was impressed. Curtis uses some pretty nice FWCF tubing on the Mongoose series of kits - the tow bundles on the 98mm are grouped like you describe Marty - I will send you a close-up picture for comment off-line if you don't mind. Over engineering is costly and sometimes the best solution make no bones about it. For re-use rocketry applications composites is the only way to go - aluminum airframes will always be too heavy or single use because it gets out of round easily - I'm settled to cough-up the chilla for CF moving forward on N class or better. Thanks again Marty. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Marty Weiser [mailto:MartyWeiser at comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 6:42 PM To: 'Scott Berfield'; Mfreptiles at aol.com; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers Filament wound tube can take the stresses we apply during high performance flights, but based upon the broken piece of Hawk Mountain tube I have I don't believe it is designed for what we do to it. I have a piece of 4" tube that is about 3 years old that I shredded at BALLS in 2007 (the G10 fin also delaminated during that flight). The tube is wound at about a 70 degree angle from the axis and uses a fairly small number of layers of a fairly large tow (about 0.100" wide by 0.010 - 0.015" thick). In addition, it appears that the tows in opposite directions are not woven together very often if at all (I should dissolve the epoxy from a section and take a look sometime). For body tube I would like to see the winding done at an angle of 20 - 40 degrees from the axis using a smaller tow that is woven together fairly frequently - about every 4 tows seems right. This will orient the fibers primarily along the axis, but with a large enough component that is around the tube to help prevent buckling. Of course you can improve upon this by using different angles and weaving patterns in different layers. For example the low angle winding on the inside and a higher angle winding in the outside to keep the inner layers in compression as they try to buckle. Unfortunately, lower angle winding is more difficult and expensive (either very long mandrels or more waste at the end). In the meantime I plan to use convolute wound tubing. If I decide to really push the envelope I may add a layer of woven sleeve to get the fibers running at an angle to axis around 30 - 45 degrees. Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 12:22 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers I have seen FWFG fail on a lot less oomph than these motors pu tout. I think the nature of the material means that a small flaw can have a disproportionate result under the stresses we tend to put on the material. The failures I have seen tend to look like the tube sort of unwound. I am no engineer (and don't even play at being one) but I wonder if the stuff is as strong as it should be in the direction of thrust. -----Original Message----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2009 09:08 AM To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] BALLS18 - Managing Show-Stoppers That's what I was afraid of. I was concerned that my 3" Extreme tubing would meet a similar fate after talking to Al Goncalves, who has shredded the HM Extreme tubing on minimum diameter M's. I don't know how Jack Caynon's held together, but it was not minimum diameter either. Looks like I'm stripping some paint and adding some carbon sleeve. If you shredded it on OS propellant, I've got problems. Mike F. In a message dated 10/6/2009 8:58:39 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes:Alan @ Hawk Mountain touts his "extreme" 98mm FWFG as N-Class capable - as it seems I either ended up with a defect / bad batch or this stuff is over-rated. I plan to CFD analyze this off-season as an exercise to step up my game plan for next year's project - I've got the motor thing down, just need to get the airframe construction on par. /Steve_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rocke ts _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Wed Oct 7 16:13:51 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 23:13:51 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: 54mm M? Ouchies. I would love to see that one go. -----Original Message----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 03:20 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust I've got a 54mm M that should test the build skills of the most competent builder. Even Triano might have a hard time with that one. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 7:34:37 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tnetcenter at gmail.com writes:----- Original Message ----- From: "W. Raymond Stoner" Sounds like a gauntlet has been thrown.You build it, we'll shred it!Conditions of the game;Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell youmotor length we need.Build using your "standard" unshredable technique.We'll provide the motor.You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc.Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue forlaunch will be chosen.You must fly in your certification level.I'm game are you?Ray-----Original Message-----From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com]On Behalf Of The Sutchek'sSent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 PMTo: rockets at rocketsnw.comSubject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrustNever having a shred in my 9 years of high power ,What type of load are all of you talking about ? , what area of g forces +or - ,,, ??? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes .I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds atBALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, butwith a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not seethe staging happen ? There seemed to be enough people risking their rocketsto the high winds and 80% blanket clouds , that I didn't need to.There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN "that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! !Thoughts anyone ? I am a life long builder , and so when I started buildinghigh power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it ,it's NOT .I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day'sand day's of CATO's and SHREDS, and chears from the flight line...after thelaunches lot's and lots of beer....Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need totry it , just to find out if it can be doneBALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible asthey used to be.R and D is king , testing , testing testing...of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,,-Paul_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From vonrang at yahoo.com Wed Oct 7 16:14:42 2009 From: vonrang at yahoo.com (Sam Grado) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 16:14:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <28527595.1254941758597.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <570753.98419.qm@web52206.mail.re2.yahoo.com> To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! Sam Grado TRA L2 "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! sales at pvconly.com http://www.pvconly.com http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge?? Oh, it should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits on casing temperature.? /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >To: Cameron Tinder >Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > >No Cameron, > >This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. > >He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT ." > >I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. > >I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a special launch for this flight. > >Ray > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Cameron Tinder" >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... > > > > >Hey Ray, > > > >Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not limited to: > > > >1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown one that has gone supersonic. ) > >2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. > >3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. > >4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. > >5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, so that does not count! > >6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. > >7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. > >8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. > >9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. > > > > > >Your rules are: > > > >1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. > >2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. > >3) We'll provide the motor. > >4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. > >5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. > >6) You must fly in your certification level. > > > >I would like to add a few more: > > > >1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging rights that come with this ?award?! > >2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. > >3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. > >4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or early summer. > >5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until the other can make the winner fail! > > > >I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort of thing might be quite fun! > > > >Best regard, > > > >Cameron > > > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ? From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Wed Oct 7 18:07:37 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:07:37 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... References: <570753.98419.qm@web52206.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4533C341F76E4FAC8C6013F70FC0ACE6@LaptopKrausert> Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this ?award?! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From fred at azinger.com Wed Oct 7 18:22:10 2009 From: fred at azinger.com (Fred Azinger) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:22:10 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <4533C341F76E4FAC8C6013F70FC0ACE6@LaptopKrausert> References: <570753.98419.qm@web52206.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4533C341F76E4FAC8C6013F70FC0ACE6@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: <00b901ca47b5$c2888520$47998f60$@com> Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this ?award?! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Wed Oct 7 18:41:24 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:41:24 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: <200910080141.n981fo08006053@omr5.networksolutionsemail.com> See - you underbuilt. You need to use the duct tape before the shred. ;) -----Original Message----- From: Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:07 PM To: Sam Grado ; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder ; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this ?award?! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From tnetcenter at gmail.com Wed Oct 7 18:45:42 2009 From: tnetcenter at gmail.com (Jeff Moore) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:45:42 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust References: <1368549466.1158521254936393981.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <05DF0F0FCD294582B4DC40F633F79046@TNTCENTER> What I was asking is would you replace the airframe/electronics if the motor catos not if it shreds the airframe. Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: raystoner99 at comcast.net Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In short, NO. There are only two kinds of research motors, those that have CATO'd and those that are going to. I *am* willing to static test the motor on the ground and provide pressure data on the design. I'll be suitably aggressive and conservative. My goal in the motor department would be to provide a motor that is a reliable, but also as aggressive as I can make it. I'm not going to just put something together and "test" it in the rocket. It will use a fully characterized propellant with at least one successful static test prior to flight. If its an interesting motor, it may have some flight tests as well. As always in a research environment, the motor is my responsibility, the airframe is his responsibility, electronics, tracking etc. If the motor hardware is *lost* (as in can't be found, but worked fine), I'm on the hook for that as well. Why would I want to replace an "airframe that can't be shredded" if I am able shred it? Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Moore" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 7:33:35 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Is there a "no CATO - full replacement guarantee" on that gauntlet? Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: "W. Raymond Stoner" Sounds like a gauntlet has been thrown. You build it, we'll shred it! Conditions of the game; Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. Build using your "standard" unshredable technique. We'll provide the motor. You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. You must fly in your certification level. I'm game are you? Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of The Sutchek's Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , What type of load are all of you talking about ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ??? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not see the staging happen ? There seemed to be enough people risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% blanket clouds , that I didn't need to. There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! Thoughts anyone ? I am a life long builder , and so when I started building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT . I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's and day's of CATO's and SHREDS, and chears from the flight line...after the launches lot's and lots of beer.... Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need to try it , just to find out if it can be done BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible as they used to be. R and D is king , testing , testing testing... of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, -Paul _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From raystoner99 at comcast.net Wed Oct 7 18:53:24 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (W. Raymond Stoner) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:53:24 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <4533C341F76E4FAC8C6013F70FC0ACE6@LaptopKrausert> References: <570753.98419.qm@web52206.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4533C341F76E4FAC8C6013F70FC0ACE6@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: <000f01ca47ba$1fe10450$5fa30cf0$@net> You nailed it Robert, it's not how hard the motor hits, but how fast the rocket actually goes. Hard hitting motor add a nice bit of excitement and an extra level of build quality. Of course, a hard hitting motor will get the same rocket with the same total impulse to a higher speed...that should be obvious. I set the "rules" with the idea of "most rockets at BALLS are minimum diameter" in mind. The people that fly at BALLS have, for the most part, one opportunity to fly projects of this size and complexity. The pull out all the stops and build for something they haven't done a lot. When you are pushing your personal limits the way the "typical" BALLS flier is, you'll find a higher level of failure...it comes with the territory. I'll bet that most of the folks that experience shreds, CATO's and deployment failures will come back next year with their new found education and fly successfully. I recall that Alex went to BALLS with Punch Drunk, his first "P" motor, and he had problems...he later flew "P" motors with regularity. I suspect that had he not passed, he would have nailed that "Q" motor and moved on to bigger things. As you discovered, it's not only the design of the rocket that comes into play, but the construction technique and the quality of construction. Make a mistake anywhere along that path, and you'll pay with a shred. Minimum diameter rockets present a whole different set of issues to overcome. You don't have the room for "mistakes" that a through the wall construction offers you. All your bonds, fin alignments, CP/CG relationships, fin resonance, axial CG, etc have to be near perfect to survive the flight dynamics of a high speed flight. Through the wall construction of non-minimum diameter rockets allows for so much more strength to be build into the airframe that they can tolerate a much greater error in construction. Now when you look at motors like Mike builds, you find that not only are you fighting the aerodynamic loads, but you are fighting inertial loading too. When you accelerate at 200g's you can rip fins off without even leaving the pad. In the end, the OP isn't wrong, building a rocket that won't shred isn't that hard...but you have to pay attention to what you are doing. It's not a slap it together and put the biggest motor that will fit endeavor, it's a plan it out, take your time, do it right effort that will get you there successfully. As Scott mentioned, you could show up with a 98mm min diameter bird that is so over build as to be ridiculous, but really, is that why you build a minimum diameter airframe? A large N powered rocket to 10K feet just doesn't turn the crank of most minimum diameter rocket builders. Ray Not an expert, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express once. -----Original Message----- From: Robert Krausert [mailto:lawndart.robert at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this ?award?! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From sealtee at cableone.net Wed Oct 7 19:06:27 2009 From: sealtee at cableone.net (Cameron Tinder) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 19:06:27 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <366452946.1183071254939800701.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> References: <1866412600.1182131254939689675.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> <366452946.1183071254939800701.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <003001ca47bb$f2c4ca40$d84e5ec0$@net> Hey Ray, I have to say that I am a little disappointed that the challenge is for the original poster only. I do understand and share your safety concerns though. I did however, spend the day driving around thinking on how I would build such a thing that could possibly stand a chance of surviving extremely high thrust and supersonic speed. Just the thought of it is very entertaining! With all due respect to Paul on this subject, anyone that flies a rocket faster than the speed of sound will find it a lot more difficult to keep it together than one that does not. Weird things happen at the speed of sound and that is why it used to be referred to as the sound barrier. This fact coupled with an unimaginable amount of acceleration force makes it way more than ten-fold more difficult to keep things together. That is why up to this point I have been very careful to avoid going supersonic until I have a little more experience. But make no mistake about it, I like a good challenge! For what it?s worth I think that Scott Berfield put it well when he said ?Clearly, some folks could use more rigor in technique and procedures, but unless you are pushing the edge of what you know, you aren't learning or growing. And as any "real" engineer will tell you, testing and R&D and math and sims only get you so far. Eventually you have to try it for real and reality has a messy tendency to screw with the best laid plans.? The truth is that we have some of the brightest rocket heads anywhere on this planet right here in the Northwest and you guys are doing just that, pushing the edge! Reality happens! Oh and just so you know Ray, you and you alone are personally responsible, for me deciding to build a minimum diameter rocket that will fly on a 75mm motor, will fly supersonic and will likely cause me to once again exceed the limits of what I now know! Thanks, thanks a lot! Cameron (Now flying at the speed of thought!) From: raystoner99 at comcast.net [mailto:raystoner99 at comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 11:23 AM To: Cameron Tinder Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: A gauntlet has been thrown... No Cameron, This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT ." I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a special launch for this flight. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cameron Tinder" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... Hey Ray, Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not limited to: 1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown one that has gone supersonic. ) 2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. 3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. 4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. 5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, so that does not count! 6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. 7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. 8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. 9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. Your rules are: 1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. 2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. 3) We'll provide the motor. 4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. 5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. 6) You must fly in your certification level. I would like to add a few more: 1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging rights that come with this ?award?! 2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. 3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. 4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or early summer. 5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until the other can make the winner fail! I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort of thing might be quite fun! Best regard, Cameron From Mfreptiles at aol.com Wed Oct 7 19:10:22 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 22:10:22 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: Gladly. Flight would have to take place at BALLS 19. Motor has been ground tested. Standard EX agreement applies; if you choose to fly it you live with the consequences. Must be minimum diameter 54mm and be capable of holding a 72" long motor. I don't feel like building another rocket anyway, but I'd like to see the motor fly. Maybe we can load it on the same rack as the 38mm L and do two screamers in a row. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 3:50:38 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, raystoner99 at comcast.net writes: I bow to the master! If you'd like to provide the motor, I'd certainly be willing to step aside. From Mfreptiles at aol.com Wed Oct 7 19:14:19 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 22:14:19 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: I've now added my motor to the challenge which is open for anybody who has the balls to go for it. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 7:07:50 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, sealtee at cableone.net writes: I have to say that I am a little disappointed that the challenge is for the original poster only. I From raystoner99 at comcast.net Wed Oct 7 19:19:29 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (W. Raymond Stoner) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 19:19:29 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <05DF0F0FCD294582B4DC40F633F79046@TNTCENTER> References: <1368549466.1158521254936393981.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> <05DF0F0FCD294582B4DC40F633F79046@TNTCENTER> Message-ID: <001601ca47bd$c4d5d6e0$4e8184a0$@net> Again, nope. I take the risk of building a motor that I can potentially lose. That's not a small investment on my part. Testing, characterizing a propellant and static testing of the specific flight motor add cost to the whole thing. I'll pby burn a lot of propellant along the way. When I say at least one successful static test, I refer to one successful static test of the FLIGHT motor. I can promise you that there will be a number of ballistic motor tests (our current practice is at least 5), smaller motor tests (multiple short 38mm motors, at least one long 38mm motor, short and long 54mm motors, etc), larger motor tests, and finally, a test of the flight motor. I'd be willing to be completely open with my data on ALL the testing. A full write up could be provided for review of another respected motor builder...I'll say this though, the group that I fly with and make motors with will want me to do something that is in their interest as well. This will be something that we will fly too. As I said, I'd test the motor and provide pressure data for review of my peers. I'd endeavor to provide a motor that I'd fly myself, risking my airframe, my electronics, etc. I won't promise there won't be a CATO, but I'll do my level best to make sure there isn't one. The idea isn't to kill a rocket, it's to test a rocket builders skill. To be honest, I hope I fail. The standard in the research community is this; I take the risk of the motor, you take the risk of the rocket. No promises, no guarantees. When you accept the motor, you accept the risk. We are completely open to you rejecting the motor. If the OP isn't comfortable, or more accurately, the other research motor builders aren't satisfied with my data, I'll redesign to a motor they are comfortable with. The reason I offered the challenge is this...in my opinion, the OP was minimizing the effort and understanding of the fliers at BALLS. Saying that what they were doing was "easy" and could be done with minimal effort. I fly at BALLS, but I'm conservative as hell. This is the first year I flew a minimum diameter rocket, and yes, I shredded it. I pushed my limits on both my flights this year. I set a personal best in altitude and learned some valuable lessons in motor construction throughout the year during our run up to BALLS. To see the guys at BALLS this year experience the level of failure that they did, did not diminish my respect for them. I witnessed firsthand the failure analysis and the level of experience gained by these fliers. I am proud to call them friends, honored that they share their knowledge with me and took umbrage that their efforts and indirectly, my efforts were minimized. When this group of racketeers are taken out of the context of BALLS and place into the commercial flight world, you'll find them surrounded by acolytes that feast on the breadth of knowledge they possess. The group of people that fly at BALLS aren't just the average flier, they are the cream of the crop. Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Moore Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:46 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust What I was asking is would you replace the airframe/electronics if the motor catos not if it shreds the airframe. Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: raystoner99 at comcast.net Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In short, NO. There are only two kinds of research motors, those that have CATO'd and those that are going to. I *am* willing to static test the motor on the ground and provide pressure data on the design. I'll be suitably aggressive and conservative. My goal in the motor department would be to provide a motor that is a reliable, but also as aggressive as I can make it. I'm not going to just put something together and "test" it in the rocket. It will use a fully characterized propellant with at least one successful static test prior to flight. If its an interesting motor, it may have some flight tests as well. As always in a research environment, the motor is my responsibility, the airframe is his responsibility, electronics, tracking etc. If the motor hardware is *lost* (as in can't be found, but worked fine), I'm on the hook for that as well. Why would I want to replace an "airframe that can't be shredded" if I am able shred it? Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Moore" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 7:33:35 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Is there a "no CATO - full replacement guarantee" on that gauntlet? Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: "W. Raymond Stoner" Sounds like a gauntlet has been thrown. You build it, we'll shred it! Conditions of the game; Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. Build using your "standard" unshredable technique. We'll provide the motor. You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. You must fly in your certification level. I'm game are you? Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of The Sutchek's Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , What type of load are all of you talking about ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ??? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not see the staging happen ? There seemed to be enough people risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% blanket clouds , that I didn't need to. There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! Thoughts anyone ? I am a life long builder , and so when I started building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT . I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's and day's of CATO's and SHREDS, and chears from the flight line...after the launches lot's and lots of beer.... Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need to try it , just to find out if it can be done BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible as they used to be. R and D is king , testing , testing testing... of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, -Paul _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From scott at scottsrockets.com Wed Oct 7 19:56:14 2009 From: scott at scottsrockets.com (Scott T Bowers) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 19:56:14 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <001601ca47bd$c4d5d6e0$4e8184a0$@net> References: <1368549466.1158521254936393981.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net><05DF0F0FCD294582B4DC40F633F79046@TNTCENTER> <001601ca47bd$c4d5d6e0$4e8184a0$@net> Message-ID: <62E5669B52BD48D18696F78C84E76CAB@Mobile2> That is the standard EX rules, even good motors can go bad. Rocket owner loses the rocket, motor builder loses his hardware. Deputy and I made a tiny mistake on liquids a couple years ago and my motor confettied Wilkerson's brand new 98mm M bird and then the mistake almost got the Dawg Pack's test stand. Live and learn, crap happens. You fly someone's EX motor and be prepared to see your work destroyed. I would note that often the EX crowd has less motor failures than the of the shelf motors. Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:19 PM To: 'Jeff Moore'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Again, nope. I take the risk of building a motor that I can potentially lose. That's not a small investment on my part. Testing, characterizing a propellant and static testing of the specific flight motor add cost to the whole thing. I'll pby burn a lot of propellant along the way. When I say at least one successful static test, I refer to one successful static test of the FLIGHT motor. I can promise you that there will be a number of ballistic motor tests (our current practice is at least 5), smaller motor tests (multiple short 38mm motors, at least one long 38mm motor, short and long 54mm motors, etc), larger motor tests, and finally, a test of the flight motor. I'd be willing to be completely open with my data on ALL the testing. A full write up could be provided for review of another respected motor builder...I'll say this though, the group that I fly with and make motors with will want me to do something that is in their interest as well. This will be something that we will fly too. As I said, I'd test the motor and provide pressure data for review of my peers. I'd endeavor to provide a motor that I'd fly myself, risking my airframe, my electronics, etc. I won't promise there won't be a CATO, but I'll do my level best to make sure there isn't one. The idea isn't to kill a rocket, it's to test a rocket builders skill. To be honest, I hope I fail. The standard in the research community is this; I take the risk of the motor, you take the risk of the rocket. No promises, no guarantees. When you accept the motor, you accept the risk. We are completely open to you rejecting the motor. If the OP isn't comfortable, or more accurately, the other research motor builders aren't satisfied with my data, I'll redesign to a motor they are comfortable with. The reason I offered the challenge is this...in my opinion, the OP was minimizing the effort and understanding of the fliers at BALLS. Saying that what they were doing was "easy" and could be done with minimal effort. I fly at BALLS, but I'm conservative as hell. This is the first year I flew a minimum diameter rocket, and yes, I shredded it. I pushed my limits on both my flights this year. I set a personal best in altitude and learned some valuable lessons in motor construction throughout the year during our run up to BALLS. To see the guys at BALLS this year experience the level of failure that they did, did not diminish my respect for them. I witnessed firsthand the failure analysis and the level of experience gained by these fliers. I am proud to call them friends, honored that they share their knowledge with me and took umbrage that their efforts and indirectly, my efforts were minimized. When this group of racketeers are taken out of the context of BALLS and place into the commercial flight world, you'll find them surrounded by acolytes that feast on the breadth of knowledge they possess. The group of people that fly at BALLS aren't just the average flier, they are the cream of the crop. Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Moore Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:46 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust What I was asking is would you replace the airframe/electronics if the motor catos not if it shreds the airframe. Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: raystoner99 at comcast.net Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In short, NO. There are only two kinds of research motors, those that have CATO'd and those that are going to. I *am* willing to static test the motor on the ground and provide pressure data on the design. I'll be suitably aggressive and conservative. My goal in the motor department would be to provide a motor that is a reliable, but also as aggressive as I can make it. I'm not going to just put something together and "test" it in the rocket. It will use a fully characterized propellant with at least one successful static test prior to flight. If its an interesting motor, it may have some flight tests as well. As always in a research environment, the motor is my responsibility, the airframe is his responsibility, electronics, tracking etc. If the motor hardware is *lost* (as in can't be found, but worked fine), I'm on the hook for that as well. Why would I want to replace an "airframe that can't be shredded" if I am able shred it? Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Moore" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 7:33:35 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Is there a "no CATO - full replacement guarantee" on that gauntlet? Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: "W. Raymond Stoner" Sounds like a gauntlet has been thrown. You build it, we'll shred it! Conditions of the game; Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. Build using your "standard" unshredable technique. We'll provide the motor. You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. You must fly in your certification level. I'm game are you? Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of The Sutchek's Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , What type of load are all of you talking about ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ??? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not see the staging happen ? There seemed to be enough people risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% blanket clouds , that I didn't need to. There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! Thoughts anyone ? I am a life long builder , and so when I started building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT . I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's and day's of CATO's and SHREDS, and chears from the flight line...after the launches lot's and lots of beer.... Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need to try it , just to find out if it can be done BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible as they used to be. R and D is king , testing , testing testing... of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, -Paul _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From fred at azinger.com Wed Oct 7 20:03:40 2009 From: fred at azinger.com (Fred Azinger) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 20:03:40 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video upload Message-ID: <00dd01ca47c3$f090b290$d1b217b0$@com> I uploaded a video of Adrian's flight at Balls-18. Sorry -- 32MByte large..... Enjoy & congrats again to Adrian It was a pleasure to watch. FredA From sb at berfield.com Wed Oct 7 20:15:29 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 03:15:29 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: One advantage I have is that I have no engineering education, limited math, and come from an arts background, so i can ask dumb questions and people cut me slack -- so here goes... any thought to a design that would allow some measure of fin flexure and vibration using energy absorbing materials to absorb the vibrations? Rather than fight to maintain total rigidity, design to dampen/absorb the energy rather than fight it to failure. No idea how one would do that, but it seems like with modern materials it should be feasible. One thought, for example -- a couple of failures I have seen looked like the fins vibrated so much that they shattered the tube -- attachment was not the issue -- the tube itself blew apart. We tend to rigidly anchor the fins to an internal structure (usually the motor mount and maybe centering rings) and then also to the outer tube wall. Would it be feasible to have a dense vibration absorbing material like a gasket in the fin slots to keep the fin from passing it's movement on to the tube wall and potentially causing a failure? -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 06:22 PM To: ''Robert Krausert'', ''Sam Grado'', raystoner99 at comcast.net, ''Cameron Tinder'', steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this ?award?! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Mfreptiles at aol.com Wed Oct 7 20:16:11 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 23:16:11 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: I did the same thing years ago. Ruined Roy's AirX rocket. Tried to use 400 micron AP in an erosive motor. Not good. No wonder nobody wants to fly my motors. Except Jack Caynon, brave soul. We've only shredded one so far. Aside from the coaxial motor failing to eject the core motor, my last cato was four or five years ago, but people remember stuff like that for a long time. Even I remember picking up pieces of Wilkerson's GPS from around my camp from Scott's cato. Stuff happens. Especially when you push the limits. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 7:56:57 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, scott at scottsrockets.com writes: Deputy and I made a tiny mistake on liquids a couple years ago and my motor confettied Wilkerson's brand new 98mm M bird and then the mistake almost got the Dawg Pack's test stand From Mfreptiles at aol.com Wed Oct 7 20:20:17 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 23:20:17 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: IMO, that would be bad. The more rigidity the better. Keep fins to a minimum to avoid flutter. Fins thicker towards the root than the edge to save on weight and drag. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 8:16:32 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, sb at berfield.com writes: Would it be feasible to have a dense vibration absorbing material like a gasket in the fin slots to keep the fin from passing it's movement on to the tube wall and potentially causing a failure? From scott at scottsrockets.com Wed Oct 7 20:24:28 2009 From: scott at scottsrockets.com (Scott T Bowers) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 20:24:28 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0398BB6C61CA44BF8290BDAE1DAF2FB0@Mobile2> Well, I read up on that very thing. Harmonic vibration can be lessened by layering different materials, such as wood form under glass under carbon. Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:15 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... One advantage I have is that I have no engineering education, limited math, and come from an arts background, so i can ask dumb questions and people cut me slack -- so here goes... any thought to a design that would allow some measure of fin flexure and vibration using energy absorbing materials to absorb the vibrations? Rather than fight to maintain total rigidity, design to dampen/absorb the energy rather than fight it to failure. No idea how one would do that, but it seems like with modern materials it should be feasible. One thought, for example -- a couple of failures I have seen looked like the fins vibrated so much that they shattered the tube -- attachment was not the issue -- the tube itself blew apart. We tend to rigidly anchor the fins to an internal structure (usually the motor mount and maybe centering rings) and then also to the outer tube wall. Would it be feasible to have a dense vibration absorbing material like a gasket in the fin slots to keep the fin from passing it's movement on to the tube wall and potentially causing a failure? -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 06:22 PM To: ''Robert Krausert'', ''Sam Grado'', raystoner99 at comcast.net, ''Cameron Tinder'', steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From fred at azinger.com Wed Oct 7 20:24:53 2009 From: fred at azinger.com (Fred Azinger) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 20:24:53 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00ed01ca47c6$e8b4a510$ba1def30$@com> Kinda like maybe a foam filled inter-wall gap to absorb energy? ;-) -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:15 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... One advantage I have is that I have no engineering education, limited math, and come from an arts background, so i can ask dumb questions and people cut me slack -- so here goes... any thought to a design that would allow some measure of fin flexure and vibration using energy absorbing materials to absorb the vibrations? Rather than fight to maintain total rigidity, design to dampen/absorb the energy rather than fight it to failure. No idea how one would do that, but it seems like with modern materials it should be feasible. One thought, for example -- a couple of failures I have seen looked like the fins vibrated so much that they shattered the tube -- attachment was not the issue -- the tube itself blew apart. We tend to rigidly anchor the fins to an internal structure (usually the motor mount and maybe centering rings) and then also to the outer tube wall. Would it be feasible to have a dense vibration absorbing material like a gasket in the fin slots to keep the fin from passing it's movement on to the tube wall and potentially causing a failure? -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 06:22 PM To: ''Robert Krausert'', ''Sam Grado'', raystoner99 at comcast.net, ''Cameron Tinder'', steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this ?award?! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From scott at scottsrockets.com Wed Oct 7 20:25:13 2009 From: scott at scottsrockets.com (Scott T Bowers) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 20:25:13 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <221B395D55E2451290F5C5D23B324D65@Mobile2> LOL, that's right, it was your camp I showered with rocket parts, forgot about that. Funny now, wasn't so much then. Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com _____ From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:16 PM To: scott at scottsrockets.com; raystoner99 at comcast.net; tnetcenter at gmail.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust I did the same thing years ago. Ruined Roy's AirX rocket. Tried to use 400 micron AP in an erosive motor. Not good. No wonder nobody wants to fly my motors. Except Jack Caynon, brave soul. We've only shredded one so far. Aside from the coaxial motor failing to eject the core motor, my last cato was four or five years ago, but people remember stuff like that for a long time. Even I remember picking up pieces of Wilkerson's GPS from around my camp from Scott's cato. Stuff happens. Especially when you push the limits. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 7:56:57 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, scott at scottsrockets.com writes: Deputy and I made a tiny mistake on liquids a couple years ago and my motor confettied Wilkerson's brand new 98mm M bird and then the mistake almost got the Dawg Pack's test stand From scott at scottsrockets.com Wed Oct 7 20:28:47 2009 From: scott at scottsrockets.com (Scott T Bowers) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 20:28:47 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <00ed01ca47c6$e8b4a510$ba1def30$@com> References: <00ed01ca47c6$e8b4a510$ba1def30$@com> Message-ID: <29BE646FF09E4B8B90B4DE2981366DF0@Mobile2> Yea, thinking about it it seems the gasket would just allow it to get moving. The better idea is to layer such as flex would be reduced on several axis, stopping it from getting going in the first place. Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:25 PM To: 'Scott Berfield'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Kinda like maybe a foam filled inter-wall gap to absorb energy? ;-) -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:15 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... One advantage I have is that I have no engineering education, limited math, and come from an arts background, so i can ask dumb questions and people cut me slack -- so here goes... any thought to a design that would allow some measure of fin flexure and vibration using energy absorbing materials to absorb the vibrations? Rather than fight to maintain total rigidity, design to dampen/absorb the energy rather than fight it to failure. No idea how one would do that, but it seems like with modern materials it should be feasible. One thought, for example -- a couple of failures I have seen looked like the fins vibrated so much that they shattered the tube -- attachment was not the issue -- the tube itself blew apart. We tend to rigidly anchor the fins to an internal structure (usually the motor mount and maybe centering rings) and then also to the outer tube wall. Would it be feasible to have a dense vibration absorbing material like a gasket in the fin slots to keep the fin from passing it's movement on to the tube wall and potentially causing a failure? -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 06:22 PM To: ''Robert Krausert'', ''Sam Grado'', raystoner99 at comcast.net, ''Cameron Tinder'', steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Wed Oct 7 20:38:35 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 20:38:35 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust References: Message-ID: <27D0D4F63BC4417986D974CF8F007750@LaptopKrausert> Mike, You say that so relaxed. I remember when I pushed the button for your 38mm L. You were over to the East, going -"yah, ya, go ahead - no worries." While we all stood there seeing a rocket beat a 9mm bullet in a drag race. Zero to mach two, I wonder if you broke military records. And you're still over there, "hmm. That looked ok." And we are all wiping the kitty litter off our chins after they dropped to the ground. AND you only lost one fin. Fred once us to clear the intersection, but your vehicle. No one saw it coming, saw an aluminum trace, and never saw it leave. Next time I go shooting pistols, I'll simply shoot... Yep, it was faster. Shoot... Yep, it was faster.. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; ; ; Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:16 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >I did the same thing years ago. Ruined Roy's AirX rocket. Tried to use > 400 micron AP in an erosive motor. Not good. > > No wonder nobody wants to fly my motors. Except Jack Caynon, brave soul. > We've only shredded one so far. Aside from the coaxial motor failing to > eject the core motor, my last cato was four or five years ago, but people > remember stuff like that for a long time. Even I remember picking up > pieces > of Wilkerson's GPS from around my camp from Scott's cato. > > Stuff happens. Especially when you push the limits. > > Mike F. > > > In a message dated 10/7/2009 7:56:57 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > scott at scottsrockets.com writes: > > Deputy and I made a tiny > mistake on liquids a couple years ago and my motor confettied Wilkerson's > brand new 98mm M bird and then the mistake almost got the Dawg Pack's > test > stand > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Wed Oct 7 20:42:26 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 20:42:26 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... References: <00ed01ca47c6$e8b4a510$ba1def30$@com> <29BE646FF09E4B8B90B4DE2981366DF0@Mobile2> Message-ID: <0EED748B584D49D2BB57C5A1FF421F88@LaptopKrausert> OK, dumb question Scott^2 and Fred. If I covered 1/8" G10 with a layer of 1/8" plywood on both sides, eploxied to the G10. Now 3/8th layered. Did I add strength, or did I just create more clutter falling to the ground? Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott T Bowers" To: "'Fred Azinger'" ; "'Scott Berfield'" ; Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:28 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > Yea, thinking about it it seems the gasket would just allow it to get > moving. The better idea is to layer such as flex would be reduced on > several > axis, stopping it from getting going in the first place. > > > Scott T. Bowers > www.scottsrockets.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:25 PM > To: 'Scott Berfield'; rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > Kinda like maybe a foam filled inter-wall gap to absorb energy? ;-) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Scott Berfield > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:15 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > One advantage I have is that I have no engineering education, limited > math, > and come from an arts background, so i can ask dumb questions and people > cut > me slack -- so here goes... > > any thought to a design that would allow some measure of fin flexure and > vibration using energy absorbing materials to absorb the vibrations? > Rather > than fight to maintain total rigidity, design to dampen/absorb the energy > rather than fight it to failure. No idea how one would do that, but it > seems > like with modern materials it should be feasible. > > One thought, for example -- a couple of failures I have seen looked like > the > fins vibrated so much that they shattered the tube -- attachment was not > the > issue -- the tube itself blew apart. We tend to rigidly anchor the fins to > an internal structure (usually the motor mount and maybe centering rings) > and then also to the outer tube wall. Would it be feasible to have a dense > vibration absorbing material like a gasket in the fin slots to keep the > fin > from passing it's movement on to the tube wall and potentially causing a > failure? > -----Original Message----- > From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 06:22 PM > To: ''Robert Krausert'', ''Sam Grado'', raystoner99 at comcast.net, ''Cameron > Tinder'', steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more > your > fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. > Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time > spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The > same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me > of > my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it > is > their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the > accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through > the > transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: > Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been > thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I > shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big > smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second > burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected > that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim > and > I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and > maximum > speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 > feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different > ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. > Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped > out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that > shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the > thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry > for > the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message > ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, > October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been > thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive > liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam > Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, > steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: > Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: > raystoner99 at comcast.net, > "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, > 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the > test > subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the > challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt > from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original > Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] > A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge > for > the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't > understand > how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an > unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket > >>construction, > I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , > it's > NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I > would > never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a > flight > like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special > launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: > "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If >>>so, >>>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, > I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have > zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low > power > rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. > >> >>>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a >>>V2, >>>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" > come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played > one > on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting > this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your > rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm > or > greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your > "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> > >>4) > You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on > diameter > of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be > chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I > would > like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win > and > will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for > one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am > not > promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am > >>promising > that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I > and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this > challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your > >>challenge > as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing > might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing > list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Wed Oct 7 20:47:50 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (Steve Cutonilli) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 20:47:50 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <00b901ca47b5$c2888520$47998f60$@com> Message-ID: I agree w/ Fred that the long exposure time in the transonic region contributed to my airframe failure - my electronics survived, so this can be verified. I mentioned earlier in this discussion that a high pressure wave propagates along the airframe and I now think this is wrong. It makes better sense that a low pressure region is formed behind the nosecone and propagates along the airframe until supersonic at which point the low pressure falls behind the rocket. I suspect in my fight, the point at which the airframe broke was under low pressure relative to the nosecone and fins. Had the tubing held together, I would expect a slight wiggle where the low pressure reached the fins causing momentary steering loss. Does any of this make sense? BTW - I don't believe fin flutter came into play with a tube failure 24-inches above the fins, but I can be wrong here too. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:22 PM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From raystoner99 at comcast.net Wed Oct 7 20:49:42 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (W. Raymond Stoner) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 20:49:42 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <29BE646FF09E4B8B90B4DE2981366DF0@Mobile2> References: <00ed01ca47c6$e8b4a510$ba1def30$@com> <29BE646FF09E4B8B90B4DE2981366DF0@Mobile2> Message-ID: <001d01ca47ca$5efaa190$1cefe4b0$@net> Different materials have different resonance. Layering the materials has the effect of damping resonance of one material because the other material is "lossy" at the frequency. The resonance is the lowest common harmonic of the materials. Say you laminate Glass, Carbon Fiber and Wood. In this example wood has a resonance of 100hz, glass 200hz and the Carbon Fiber at 400 hertz. The 4th harmonic of the wood is 400 hertz, the glass's second harmonic is 400hz and the Carbon Fiber fundamental is 400hz...therefore the resonance of the structure is at 400hz. This example would have a problem at 400 hz, significantly so. It would be worse than the carbon alone. The added energy of the wood and glass would be added into the resonance. The same laminate structure with wood at 150 hz, glass at 200hz and carbon at 300hz would result in a strong resonance at 600hz. Higher than any of the individual materials. The resonance force would also be lower because each of the materials would not be at its fundamental, where the strongest resonance occurs. The sum of the energy at 600 hertz would be less. Careful design of the structure will lead to a rigid structure with a resonance point where the vortex off the fin doesn't excite it. Of course, you'll need some advanced math to figure it all out. A CFD program would be helpful. Even with all the tools in the world, the best you'd get is "close" and testing would reveal the truth of the models. If you had a supersonic wind tunnel, you could test things without flight testing, but I'm pretty sure most of us don't have access to one of those...dang it. Of course, a fin will flex and resonate in all three dimensions...each dimension will have a different resonance point. Its way beyond me to try to calculate it all. I'll just build and hope for the best! Maybe I'll get lucky and design a fin that is able to withstand the forces of resonance. Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott T Bowers Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:29 PM To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Scott Berfield'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Yea, thinking about it it seems the gasket would just allow it to get moving. The better idea is to layer such as flex would be reduced on several axis, stopping it from getting going in the first place. Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:25 PM To: 'Scott Berfield'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Kinda like maybe a foam filled inter-wall gap to absorb energy? ;-) -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:15 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... One advantage I have is that I have no engineering education, limited math, and come from an arts background, so i can ask dumb questions and people cut me slack -- so here goes... any thought to a design that would allow some measure of fin flexure and vibration using energy absorbing materials to absorb the vibrations? Rather than fight to maintain total rigidity, design to dampen/absorb the energy rather than fight it to failure. No idea how one would do that, but it seems like with modern materials it should be feasible. One thought, for example -- a couple of failures I have seen looked like the fins vibrated so much that they shattered the tube -- attachment was not the issue -- the tube itself blew apart. We tend to rigidly anchor the fins to an internal structure (usually the motor mount and maybe centering rings) and then also to the outer tube wall. Would it be feasible to have a dense vibration absorbing material like a gasket in the fin slots to keep the fin from passing it's movement on to the tube wall and potentially causing a failure? -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 06:22 PM To: ''Robert Krausert'', ''Sam Grado'', raystoner99 at comcast.net, ''Cameron Tinder'', steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From MartyWeiser at comcast.net Wed Oct 7 21:03:01 2009 From: MartyWeiser at comcast.net (Marty Weiser) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 21:03:01 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fin Flutter - was A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <0EED748B584D49D2BB57C5A1FF421F88@LaptopKrausert> References: <00ed01ca47c6$e8b4a510$ba1def30$@com> <29BE646FF09E4B8B90B4DE2981366DF0@Mobile2> <0EED748B584D49D2BB57C5A1FF421F88@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: <01a101ca47cc$3b49c030$b1dd4090$@net> Robert, You have increased the strength, but also increased the drag. A more effective approach is to then sand the fins so they are 3/8" thick at the root and only 1/8" thick at the tip. You now have a structure with a much more complex vibration response that will be harder to excite. In addition, you have a larger area to bond to the body tube and less total drag than a uniform cross section fin. The biggest problem is getting the plywood to bond to the G10. For some of my fins I laminated 2 - 3 layers of glass between the sheets of plywood before tapering to avoid the issues in bonding to fully cured G10 fiberglass. My most recent fins for a 75 mm rocket were composed of 1/16" G10 with alternate layers of carbon fiber and glass bonded to them to build the taper. The first was CF that went 1/4 of the span, the second was FG for 1/2 the span, third was 3/4 span CF, and finally full span FG. Both sides were laminated to the roughened G10 at once between sheets of 3/4" plywood covered with plastic and compressed with 6 hand screw clamps - probably around 100 - 150 psi on the fin surface. After clean up these were attached the BT with JB Weld using a discontinuous slot in the BT - 3 slots about 1/5 of the root edge length. A layer of vacuum bagged glass for tip to tip and then vacuum bagged a thinner layer of glass over the leading edge. This was the booster at BALLS and was simmed to hit about mach 1.3. The sustainer CATOed before I could find out if the fins made as listed in the first paragraph would handle mach 2+ (same tip to tip and leading edge glass). Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:42 PM To: Scott T Bowers; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Scott Berfield'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fin Flutter - was A gauntlet has been thrown... OK, dumb question Scott^2 and Fred. If I covered 1/8" G10 with a layer of 1/8" plywood on both sides, eploxied to the G10. Now 3/8th layered. Did I add strength, or did I just create more clutter falling to the ground? Cheers, Robert From raystoner99 at comcast.net Wed Oct 7 21:06:49 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (W. Raymond Stoner) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 21:06:49 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001e01ca47cc$c313b6b0$493b2410$@net> Well there you go Cameron! Reduce the airframe diameter to 54mm, get your L3 Certification and build away. BALLS 19 here I come! Ray From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:14 PM To: sealtee at cableone.net; raystoner99 at comcast.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... I've now added my motor to the challenge which is open for anybody who has the balls to go for it. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 7:07:50 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, sealtee at cableone.net writes: I have to say that I am a little disappointed that the challenge is for the original poster only. I From Mfreptiles at aol.com Wed Oct 7 21:11:11 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 00:11:11 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: Another factor you might consider is the placement of fins higher on the airframe contributes to increased yaw, which might be the deal breaker at mach transition. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 8:48:36 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes: I agree w/ Fred that the long exposure time in the transonic region contributed to my airframe failure - my electronics survived, so this can be verified. I mentioned earlier in this discussion that a high pressure wave propagates along the airframe and I now think this is wrong. It makes better sense that a low pressure region is formed behind the nosecone and propagates along the airframe until supersonic at which point the low pressure falls behind the rocket. I suspect in my fight, the point at which the airframe broke was under low pressure relative to the nosecone and fins. Had the tubing held together, I would expect a slight wiggle where the low pressure reached the fins causing momentary steering loss. Does any of this make sense? BTW - I don't believe fin flutter came into play with a tube failure 24-inches above the fins, but I can be wrong here too. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:22 PM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From tnetcenter at gmail.com Wed Oct 7 21:12:32 2009 From: tnetcenter at gmail.com (Jeff Moore) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 21:12:32 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust References: <1368549466.1158521254936393981.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> <05DF0F0FCD294582B4DC40F633F79046@TNTCENTER> <001601ca47bd$c4d5d6e0$4e8184a0$@net> Message-ID: <87D1394D2B444B1D8BEC340C1B4FB7A4@TNTCENTER> I agree completely with everything you said. I've learned more by hanging out with Alex, Mike and Fred and the rest of you and asking questions than I could ever learn by trial and error. I remember at Balls 15 or 16 standing behind Jeff Jakobs as he pushed the button on his 8in dia (I think) hybrid only to have it go Kafoom. As we stood there with pieces of aluminum raining down around us, I was blown away more by his reaction to the event than the cato itself. He just kinda shrugged his shoulders and said something to the effect of "Oh Well, back to the drawing board!" It turned out that one of the fueling lines had ruptured so the combustion chamber was flooded with nitrous. When he pushed the button, nothing happened for a second or so. The nitrous ignited and flashed back into the tank instantly rupturing it. A real shame too, that was an awesome looking rocket that was going to fly real high - definitely pushing the envelope all the way. You push the button and take your chances. Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: "W. Raymond Stoner" Again, nope. I take the risk of building a motor that I can potentially lose. That's not a small investment on my part. Testing, characterizing a propellant and static testing of the specific flight motor add cost to the whole thing. I'll pby burn a lot of propellant along the way. When I say at least one successful static test, I refer to one successful static test of the FLIGHT motor. I can promise you that there will be a number of ballistic motor tests (our current practice is at least 5), smaller motor tests (multiple short 38mm motors, at least one long 38mm motor, short and long 54mm motors, etc), larger motor tests, and finally, a test of the flight motor. I'd be willing to be completely open with my data on ALL the testing. A full write up could be provided for review of another respected motor builder...I'll say this though, the group that I fly with and make motors with will want me to do something that is in their interest as well. This will be something that we will fly too. As I said, I'd test the motor and provide pressure data for review of my peers. I'd endeavor to provide a motor that I'd fly myself, risking my airframe, my electronics, etc. I won't promise there won't be a CATO, but I'll do my level best to make sure there isn't one. The idea isn't to kill a rocket, it's to test a rocket builders skill. To be honest, I hope I fail. The standard in the research community is this; I take the risk of the motor, you take the risk of the rocket. No promises, no guarantees. When you accept the motor, you accept the risk. We are completely open to you rejecting the motor. If the OP isn't comfortable, or more accurately, the other research motor builders aren't satisfied with my data, I'll redesign to a motor they are comfortable with. The reason I offered the challenge is this...in my opinion, the OP was minimizing the effort and understanding of the fliers at BALLS. Saying that what they were doing was "easy" and could be done with minimal effort. I fly at BALLS, but I'm conservative as hell. This is the first year I flew a minimum diameter rocket, and yes, I shredded it. I pushed my limits on both my flights this year. I set a personal best in altitude and learned some valuable lessons in motor construction throughout the year during our run up to BALLS. To see the guys at BALLS this year experience the level of failure that they did, did not diminish my respect for them. I witnessed firsthand the failure analysis and the level of experience gained by these fliers. I am proud to call them friends, honored that they share their knowledge with me and took umbrage that their efforts and indirectly, my efforts were minimized. When this group of racketeers are taken out of the context of BALLS and place into the commercial flight world, you'll find them surrounded by acolytes that feast on the breadth of knowledge they possess. The group of people that fly at BALLS aren't just the average flier, they are the cream of the crop. Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Moore Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:46 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust What I was asking is would you replace the airframe/electronics if the motor catos not if it shreds the airframe. Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: raystoner99 at comcast.net Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In short, NO. There are only two kinds of research motors, those that have CATO'd and those that are going to. I *am* willing to static test the motor on the ground and provide pressure data on the design. I'll be suitably aggressive and conservative. My goal in the motor department would be to provide a motor that is a reliable, but also as aggressive as I can make it. I'm not going to just put something together and "test" it in the rocket. It will use a fully characterized propellant with at least one successful static test prior to flight. If its an interesting motor, it may have some flight tests as well. As always in a research environment, the motor is my responsibility, the airframe is his responsibility, electronics, tracking etc. If the motor hardware is *lost* (as in can't be found, but worked fine), I'm on the hook for that as well. Why would I want to replace an "airframe that can't be shredded" if I am able shred it? Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Moore" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 7:33:35 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Is there a "no CATO - full replacement guarantee" on that gauntlet? Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: "W. Raymond Stoner" Sounds like a gauntlet has been thrown. You build it, we'll shred it! Conditions of the game; Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. Build using your "standard" unshredable technique. We'll provide the motor. You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. You must fly in your certification level. I'm game are you? Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of The Sutchek's Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , What type of load are all of you talking about ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ??? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not see the staging happen ? There seemed to be enough people risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% blanket clouds , that I didn't need to. There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! Thoughts anyone ? I am a life long builder , and so when I started building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT . I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's and day's of CATO's and SHREDS, and chears from the flight line...after the launches lot's and lots of beer.... Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need to try it , just to find out if it can be done BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible as they used to be. R and D is king , testing , testing testing... of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, -Paul _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Wed Oct 7 21:23:22 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (Steve Cutonilli) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 21:23:22 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5003D9691950478D84FABC356B1AAE7E@steve> Ah, disregard what I said for a bit. I'm sorta right, but way wrong in terms of quantifying some things - just blew the cob-webs off of "Aerodynamics" by Theodore von Karman. Geesh, it's not like I'm already bandwidth challenged - the book gets tossed on the magazine rack beside the toilet in an effort to fly for cheaper and wiser 350-some days from now. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Steve Cutonilli Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:48 PM To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... I agree w/ Fred that the long exposure time in the transonic region contributed to my airframe failure - my electronics survived, so this can be verified. I mentioned earlier in this discussion that a high pressure wave propagates along the airframe and I now think this is wrong. It makes better sense that a low pressure region is formed behind the nosecone and propagates along the airframe until supersonic at which point the low pressure falls behind the rocket. I suspect in my fight, the point at which the airframe broke was under low pressure relative to the nosecone and fins. Had the tubing held together, I would expect a slight wiggle where the low pressure reached the fins causing momentary steering loss. Does any of this make sense? BTW - I don't believe fin flutter came into play with a tube failure 24-inches above the fins, but I can be wrong here too. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:22 PM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Wed Oct 7 21:41:10 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (Steve Cutonilli) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 21:41:10 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <62E5669B52BD48D18696F78C84E76CAB@Mobile2> Message-ID: <1867393328E1400E8997414F83A2788B@steve> Yup - them is the rules and it smarts if you've never catoed a motor - I always get a laugh at the tension some folks exhibit - Roy still does - Neil and Rob are more okay with it - I've never soiled my knickers over it. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott T Bowers Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:56 PM To: 'W. Raymond Stoner'; 'Jeff Moore'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust That is the standard EX rules, even good motors can go bad. Rocket owner loses the rocket, motor builder loses his hardware. Deputy and I made a tiny mistake on liquids a couple years ago and my motor confettied Wilkerson's brand new 98mm M bird and then the mistake almost got the Dawg Pack's test stand. Live and learn, crap happens. You fly someone's EX motor and be prepared to see your work destroyed. I would note that often the EX crowd has less motor failures than the of the shelf motors. Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:19 PM To: 'Jeff Moore'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Again, nope. I take the risk of building a motor that I can potentially lose. That's not a small investment on my part. Testing, characterizing a propellant and static testing of the specific flight motor add cost to the whole thing. I'll pby burn a lot of propellant along the way. When I say at least one successful static test, I refer to one successful static test of the FLIGHT motor. I can promise you that there will be a number of ballistic motor tests (our current practice is at least 5), smaller motor tests (multiple short 38mm motors, at least one long 38mm motor, short and long 54mm motors, etc), larger motor tests, and finally, a test of the flight motor. I'd be willing to be completely open with my data on ALL the testing. A full write up could be provided for review of another respected motor builder...I'll say this though, the group that I fly with and make motors with will want me to do something that is in their interest as well. This will be something that we will fly too. As I said, I'd test the motor and provide pressure data for review of my peers. I'd endeavor to provide a motor that I'd fly myself, risking my airframe, my electronics, etc. I won't promise there won't be a CATO, but I'll do my level best to make sure there isn't one. The idea isn't to kill a rocket, it's to test a rocket builders skill. To be honest, I hope I fail. The standard in the research community is this; I take the risk of the motor, you take the risk of the rocket. No promises, no guarantees. When you accept the motor, you accept the risk. We are completely open to you rejecting the motor. If the OP isn't comfortable, or more accurately, the other research motor builders aren't satisfied with my data, I'll redesign to a motor they are comfortable with. The reason I offered the challenge is this...in my opinion, the OP was minimizing the effort and understanding of the fliers at BALLS. Saying that what they were doing was "easy" and could be done with minimal effort. I fly at BALLS, but I'm conservative as hell. This is the first year I flew a minimum diameter rocket, and yes, I shredded it. I pushed my limits on both my flights this year. I set a personal best in altitude and learned some valuable lessons in motor construction throughout the year during our run up to BALLS. To see the guys at BALLS this year experience the level of failure that they did, did not diminish my respect for them. I witnessed firsthand the failure analysis and the level of experience gained by these fliers. I am proud to call them friends, honored that they share their knowledge with me and took umbrage that their efforts and indirectly, my efforts were minimized. When this group of racketeers are taken out of the context of BALLS and place into the commercial flight world, you'll find them surrounded by acolytes that feast on the breadth of knowledge they possess. The group of people that fly at BALLS aren't just the average flier, they are the cream of the crop. Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Moore Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:46 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust What I was asking is would you replace the airframe/electronics if the motor catos not if it shreds the airframe. Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: raystoner99 at comcast.net Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In short, NO. There are only two kinds of research motors, those that have CATO'd and those that are going to. I *am* willing to static test the motor on the ground and provide pressure data on the design. I'll be suitably aggressive and conservative. My goal in the motor department would be to provide a motor that is a reliable, but also as aggressive as I can make it. I'm not going to just put something together and "test" it in the rocket. It will use a fully characterized propellant with at least one successful static test prior to flight. If its an interesting motor, it may have some flight tests as well. As always in a research environment, the motor is my responsibility, the airframe is his responsibility, electronics, tracking etc. If the motor hardware is *lost* (as in can't be found, but worked fine), I'm on the hook for that as well. Why would I want to replace an "airframe that can't be shredded" if I am able shred it? Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Moore" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 7:33:35 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Is there a "no CATO - full replacement guarantee" on that gauntlet? Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: "W. Raymond Stoner" Sounds like a gauntlet has been thrown. You build it, we'll shred it! Conditions of the game; Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell you motor length we need. Build using your "standard" unshredable technique. We'll provide the motor. You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue for launch will be chosen. You must fly in your certification level. I'm game are you? Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of The Sutchek's Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Never having a shred in my 9 years of high power , What type of load are all of you talking about ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ??? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . I was not able to launch my M to M powered two stage due to high winds at BALLS this year, and yes I did think about launching in the wind anyway, but with a cloud ceiling of about 2000' , why would I want to launch and not see the staging happen ? There seemed to be enough people risking their rockets to the high winds and 80% blanket clouds , that I didn't need to. There were multiple times at this years BALLS with rockets " Comming IN " that I didn't know whether to dodge left or right ! ! ! Thoughts anyone ? I am a life long builder , and so when I started building high power rockets , it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I see it , it's NOT . I've been to a BALLS every other year and it seems to be the same , day's and day's of CATO's and SHREDS, and chears from the flight line...after the launches lot's and lots of beer.... Perhaps I'm just not pulling 200g's off the pad , and perhaps I will need to try it , just to find out if it can be done BALLS isn't changing but as I get older , my rockets aren't as expendible as they used to be. R and D is king , testing , testing testing... of course , just my 2 cent worthless,,, -Paul _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Wed Oct 7 21:54:17 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (Steve Cutonilli) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 21:54:17 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: It was flying straight when it broke and atmospherics were perfect - the only boast I can make about BALLS18 - it was the very first flight of the event on Friday and the LCO did okay w/ my last name. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:11 PM To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com; fred at azinger.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com; vonrang at yahoo.com; raystoner99 at comcast.net; sealtee at cableone.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Another factor you might consider is the placement of fins higher on the airframe contributes to increased yaw, which might be the deal breaker at mach transition. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 8:48:36 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes: I agree w/ Fred that the long exposure time in the transonic region contributed to my airframe failure - my electronics survived, so this can be verified. I mentioned earlier in this discussion that a high pressure wave propagates along the airframe and I now think this is wrong. It makes better sense that a low pressure region is formed behind the nosecone and propagates along the airframe until supersonic at which point the low pressure falls behind the rocket. I suspect in my fight, the point at which the airframe broke was under low pressure relative to the nosecone and fins. Had the tubing held together, I would expect a slight wiggle where the low pressure reached the fins causing momentary steering loss. Does any of this make sense? BTW - I don't believe fin flutter came into play with a tube failure 24-inches above the fins, but I can be wrong here too. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:22 PM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From kent.newman at comcast.net Wed Oct 7 22:03:23 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 22:03:23 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <004c01ca47d4$a9c8abe0$fd5a03a0$@newman@comcast.net> Yes, because he thought you were a pasta :-) Now, about this thermite discussion...... Kent -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Steve Cutonilli Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:54 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; fred at azinger.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com; vonrang at yahoo.com; raystoner99 at comcast.net; sealtee at cableone.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... It was flying straight when it broke and atmospherics were perfect - the only boast I can make about BALLS18 - it was the very first flight of the event on Friday and the LCO did okay w/ my last name. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:11 PM To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com; fred at azinger.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com; vonrang at yahoo.com; raystoner99 at comcast.net; sealtee at cableone.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Another factor you might consider is the placement of fins higher on the airframe contributes to increased yaw, which might be the deal breaker at mach transition. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 8:48:36 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes: I agree w/ Fred that the long exposure time in the transonic region contributed to my airframe failure - my electronics survived, so this can be verified. I mentioned earlier in this discussion that a high pressure wave propagates along the airframe and I now think this is wrong. It makes better sense that a low pressure region is formed behind the nosecone and propagates along the airframe until supersonic at which point the low pressure falls behind the rocket. I suspect in my fight, the point at which the airframe broke was under low pressure relative to the nosecone and fins. Had the tubing held together, I would expect a slight wiggle where the low pressure reached the fins causing momentary steering loss. Does any of this make sense? BTW - I don't believe fin flutter came into play with a tube failure 24-inches above the fins, but I can be wrong here too. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:22 PM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Wed Oct 7 22:10:45 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (Steve Cutonilli) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 22:10:45 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <004c01ca47d4$a9c8abe0$fd5a03a0$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: <830AC5A7CA744919B93377D35FFDE959@steve> Hey, what's the matter for you - make the thermite discussion a new thread and I'm game. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:03 PM To: 'Steve Cutonilli' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Yes, because he thought you were a pasta :-) Now, about this thermite discussion...... Kent -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Steve Cutonilli Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:54 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; fred at azinger.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com; vonrang at yahoo.com; raystoner99 at comcast.net; sealtee at cableone.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... It was flying straight when it broke and atmospherics were perfect - the only boast I can make about BALLS18 - it was the very first flight of the event on Friday and the LCO did okay w/ my last name. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:11 PM To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com; fred at azinger.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com; vonrang at yahoo.com; raystoner99 at comcast.net; sealtee at cableone.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Another factor you might consider is the placement of fins higher on the airframe contributes to increased yaw, which might be the deal breaker at mach transition. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 8:48:36 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes: I agree w/ Fred that the long exposure time in the transonic region contributed to my airframe failure - my electronics survived, so this can be verified. I mentioned earlier in this discussion that a high pressure wave propagates along the airframe and I now think this is wrong. It makes better sense that a low pressure region is formed behind the nosecone and propagates along the airframe until supersonic at which point the low pressure falls behind the rocket. I suspect in my fight, the point at which the airframe broke was under low pressure relative to the nosecone and fins. Had the tubing held together, I would expect a slight wiggle where the low pressure reached the fins causing momentary steering loss. Does any of this make sense? BTW - I don't believe fin flutter came into play with a tube failure 24-inches above the fins, but I can be wrong here too. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:22 PM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From kent.newman at comcast.net Wed Oct 7 22:20:14 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 22:20:14 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <830AC5A7CA744919B93377D35FFDE959@steve> References: <004c01ca47d4$a9c8abe0$fd5a03a0$@newman@comcast.net> <830AC5A7CA744919B93377D35FFDE959@steve> Message-ID: <005501ca47d7$04e88b10$0eb9a130$@newman@comcast.net> Spoken like a true eye-talian, Steve. We spray for thermites twice a year here around the Sound! Be glad to start a new thread to talk more. My Gawd! What am I saying? You know, this happened to me when Utley wanted to do an interview right before we touched Planck's Konstant off. Wright and Smith were undoubtedly proud to have me as a team member right then. Hope Bob does a lot of editing on the BALLS DVD. Gotta change my meds...... Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:11 PM To: 'Kent Newman' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Hey, what's the matter for you - make the thermite discussion a new thread and I'm game. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:03 PM To: 'Steve Cutonilli' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Yes, because he thought you were a pasta :-) Now, about this thermite discussion...... Kent -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Steve Cutonilli Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:54 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; fred at azinger.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com; vonrang at yahoo.com; raystoner99 at comcast.net; sealtee at cableone.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... It was flying straight when it broke and atmospherics were perfect - the only boast I can make about BALLS18 - it was the very first flight of the event on Friday and the LCO did okay w/ my last name. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:11 PM To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com; fred at azinger.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com; vonrang at yahoo.com; raystoner99 at comcast.net; sealtee at cableone.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Another factor you might consider is the placement of fins higher on the airframe contributes to increased yaw, which might be the deal breaker at mach transition. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 8:48:36 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes: I agree w/ Fred that the long exposure time in the transonic region contributed to my airframe failure - my electronics survived, so this can be verified. I mentioned earlier in this discussion that a high pressure wave propagates along the airframe and I now think this is wrong. It makes better sense that a low pressure region is formed behind the nosecone and propagates along the airframe until supersonic at which point the low pressure falls behind the rocket. I suspect in my fight, the point at which the airframe broke was under low pressure relative to the nosecone and fins. Had the tubing held together, I would expect a slight wiggle where the low pressure reached the fins causing momentary steering loss. Does any of this make sense? BTW - I don't believe fin flutter came into play with a tube failure 24-inches above the fins, but I can be wrong here too. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:22 PM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From scott at scottsrockets.com Wed Oct 7 22:35:33 2009 From: scott at scottsrockets.com (Scott T Bowers) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 22:35:33 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <005501ca47d7$04e88b10$0eb9a130$@newman@comcast.net> References: <004c01ca47d4$a9c8abe0$fd5a03a0$@newman@comcast.net><830AC5A7CA744919B93377D35FFDE959@steve> <005501ca47d7$04e88b10$0eb9a130$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: Filter down as usual Kent? Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Kent Newman Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:20 PM To: 'Steve Cutonilli' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Spoken like a true eye-talian, Steve. We spray for thermites twice a year here around the Sound! Be glad to start a new thread to talk more. My Gawd! What am I saying? You know, this happened to me when Utley wanted to do an interview right before we touched Planck's Konstant off. Wright and Smith were undoubtedly proud to have me as a team member right then. Hope Bob does a lot of editing on the BALLS DVD. Gotta change my meds...... Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:11 PM To: 'Kent Newman' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Hey, what's the matter for you - make the thermite discussion a new thread and I'm game. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:03 PM To: 'Steve Cutonilli' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Yes, because he thought you were a pasta :-) Now, about this thermite discussion...... Kent -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Steve Cutonilli Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:54 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; fred at azinger.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com; vonrang at yahoo.com; raystoner99 at comcast.net; sealtee at cableone.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... It was flying straight when it broke and atmospherics were perfect - the only boast I can make about BALLS18 - it was the very first flight of the event on Friday and the LCO did okay w/ my last name. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:11 PM To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com; fred at azinger.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com; vonrang at yahoo.com; raystoner99 at comcast.net; sealtee at cableone.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Another factor you might consider is the placement of fins higher on the airframe contributes to increased yaw, which might be the deal breaker at mach transition. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 8:48:36 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes: I agree w/ Fred that the long exposure time in the transonic region contributed to my airframe failure - my electronics survived, so this can be verified. I mentioned earlier in this discussion that a high pressure wave propagates along the airframe and I now think this is wrong. It makes better sense that a low pressure region is formed behind the nosecone and propagates along the airframe until supersonic at which point the low pressure falls behind the rocket. I suspect in my fight, the point at which the airframe broke was under low pressure relative to the nosecone and fins. Had the tubing held together, I would expect a slight wiggle where the low pressure reached the fins causing momentary steering loss. Does any of this make sense? BTW - I don't believe fin flutter came into play with a tube failure 24-inches above the fins, but I can be wrong here too. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:22 PM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance. Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From vincesimoneau at msn.com Wed Oct 7 23:22:10 2009 From: vincesimoneau at msn.com (Vince Simoneau) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 23:22:10 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Xombie Rocket In-Reply-To: <005501ca47d7$04e88b10$0eb9a130$@newman@comcast.net> References: <004c01ca47d4$a9c8abe0$fd5a03a0$@newman@comcast.net> <830AC5A7CA744919B93377D35FFDE959@steve> Message-ID: Very cool.... http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/10/07/2091980.aspx, Off we go . . . to the MOON Alice ! ! ! > From: kent.newman at comcast.net > To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 22:20:14 -0700 > CC: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > Spoken like a true eye-talian, Steve. > > We spray for thermites twice a year here around the Sound! Be glad to start > a new thread to talk more. > > My Gawd! What am I saying? > > You know, this happened to me when Utley wanted to do an interview right > before we touched Planck's Konstant off. Wright and Smith were undoubtedly > proud to have me as a team member right then. Hope Bob does a lot of > editing on the BALLS DVD. > > Gotta change my meds...... > > Kent > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:11 PM > To: 'Kent Newman' > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > Hey, what's the matter for you - make the thermite discussion a new > thread and I'm game. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:03 PM > To: 'Steve Cutonilli' > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > Yes, because he thought you were a pasta :-) > > Now, about this thermite discussion...... > > Kent > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com > [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Steve Cutonilli > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:54 PM > To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; fred at azinger.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com; > vonrang at yahoo.com; raystoner99 at comcast.net; sealtee at cableone.net > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > It was flying straight when it broke and atmospherics were perfect - the > only boast I can make about BALLS18 - it was the very first flight of > the event on Friday and the LCO did okay w/ my last name. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:11 PM > To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com; fred at azinger.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com; > vonrang at yahoo.com; raystoner99 at comcast.net; sealtee at cableone.net > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > Another factor you might consider is the placement of fins higher on the > airframe contributes to increased yaw, which might be the deal breaker > at mach transition. > > Mike F. > > In a message dated 10/7/2009 8:48:36 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes: > I agree w/ Fred that the long exposure time in the transonic region > contributed to my airframe failure - my electronics survived, so this > can be verified. > > I mentioned earlier in this discussion that a high pressure wave > propagates along the airframe and I now think this is wrong. > > It makes better sense that a low pressure region is formed behind the > nosecone and propagates along the airframe until supersonic at which > point the low pressure falls behind the rocket. > > I suspect in my fight, the point at which the airframe broke was under > low pressure relative to the nosecone and fins. Had the tubing held > together, I would expect a slight wiggle where the low pressure reached > the fins causing momentary steering loss. > > Does any of this make sense? > > BTW - I don't believe fin flutter came into play with a tube failure > 24-inches above the fins, but I can be wrong here too. > > /Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:22 PM > To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron > Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... > The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to > death you dance. > > Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the > time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are > peak.... > The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... > > Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic > intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that > intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... > > Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region > ASAP for best results. > > FredA > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com > [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM > To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; > steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I > shredded a > tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off > the > pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. > Altimeter > said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because > my > sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. > > There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. > For > me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But > no! > Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and > avoid > that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. > Greg > Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. > > So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds > > cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the > thrust > SMACK and overall SPEED. > > Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the > topic. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sam Grado" > To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; > > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > > > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner > should > > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > > > Sam Grado > > TRA L2 > > > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > > > sales at pvconly.com > > http://www.pvconly.com > > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com > wrote: > > > > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays > at a > > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, > it > > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA > limits > > on casing temperature. /Steve > > > > -----Original Message----- > >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net > >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM > >>To: Cameron Tinder > >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > >> > >> > >>No Cameron, > >> > >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. > >> > >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the > country > >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power > rocket > >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and > as I > >>see it , it's NOT ." > >> > >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. > >> > >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations > of > >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during > a > >>special launch for this flight. > >> > >>Ray > >> > >>----- Original Message ----- > >>From: "Cameron Tinder" > >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net > >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada > Pacific > >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>Hey Ray, > >> > >> > >> > >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If > so, > >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are > not > >>limited to: > >> > >> > >> > >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even > flown > >>one that has gone supersonic. ) > >> > >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. > >> > >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. > >> > >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. > >> > >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a > V2, > >>so that does not count! > >> > >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. > >> > >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. > >> > >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this > level. > >> > >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>Your rules are: > >> > >> > >> > >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll > tell > >>you motor length we need. > >> > >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. > >> > >>3) We'll provide the motor. > >> > >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. > >> > >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable > venue > >>for launch will be chosen. > >> > >>6) You must fly in your certification level. > >> > >> > >> > >>I would like to add a few more: > >> > >> > >> > >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the > bragging > >>rights that come with this "award"! > >> > >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight > >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. > >> > >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. > >> > >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or > >>early summer. > >> > >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or > until > >>the other can make the winner fail! > >> > >> > >> > >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I > am > >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining > for > >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! > Frankly, > >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept > your > >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this > sort > >>of thing might be quite fun! > >> > >> > >> > >>Best regard, > >> > >> > >> > >>Cameron > >> > >> > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Rockets mailing list > >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft?s powerful SPAM protection. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/ From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Wed Oct 7 23:28:31 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 23:28:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Fin flutter Message-ID: This discussion of fin design reminded me of a high school friend who built a toy car with square wheels. It is indeed possible to use square wheels with a suspension designed to result in a smooth ride. That was his point. But it's easier to use round wheels. The best way to deal with fin flutter is to not allow it in the first place. And as the masters of rocketry have pointed out here, that ain't easy and requires thought and practice. Fin design for high performance rockets is still an evolving art. More art than science. +McG+ From sutchek at sbcglobal.net Thu Oct 8 00:00:50 2009 From: sutchek at sbcglobal.net (The Sutchek's) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 00:00:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <63352.61251.qm@web82008.mail.mud.yahoo.com> AND SO? , after reading and re reading a few of the more interesting emails... I accept. ? but on a more serious note : the airframes and their inherent problems were ACTUALLY a side note to my main point of the people that were putting on BALLS allowing rockets to fly in unsafe conditons....and of the people that?" JUST HAD TO FLY " when conditions were not safe...?From what I know , there?was ?more than one Trippoli board member that?was ?at ?BALLS and they and the LCO allowed rockets to fly in conditions that are restricted by Trippoli rules ? cut and paste this: Weather The RSO must have clear and convincing evidence that the following constraints are not violated. 1. Do not launch if ground level winds exceed 20 mph. 2. Do not launch if the planned flight path will carry the vehicle through any clouds ? BUT any HOO ,,,, In a year we'll see whats up ! or not :) ? keep in touch !? - Paul From absworld at cet.com Thu Oct 8 07:22:18 2009 From: absworld at cet.com (Bob & Ann Yanecek) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:22:18 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <4533C341F76E4FAC8C6013F70FC0ACE6@LaptopKrausert> References: <570753.98419.qm@web52206.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4533C341F76E4FAC8C6013F70FC0ACE6@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: <00b101ca4822$c18de3f0$44a9abd0$@com> After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this ?award?! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Thu Oct 8 07:35:43 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:35:43 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fin Flutter - was A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: <200910081435.n98EZi9p024590@omr15.networksolutionsemail.com> I did a low rent version of this on my L3 flight. It simmed that it would sit just below Mach for a bit so I was worried. Tube was 6" phenolic with s-glass wrap and the fins were G10. My solution was to do tip to tip s-glass, then half to half s-glass then 1/3 to 1/3 s-glass. This added noticeably to the stiffness and I had no issues and the slight taper helped damp things -----Original Message----- From: Marty Weiser Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:03 PM To: 'Robert Krausert' ; 'Scott T Bowers' ; 'Fred Azinger' ; 'Scott Berfield' ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Fin Flutter - was A gauntlet has been thrown... Robert, You have increased the strength, but also increased the drag. A more effective approach is to then sand the fins so they are 3/8" thick at the root and only 1/8" thick at the tip. You now have a structure with a much more complex vibration response that will be harder to excite. In addition, you have a larger area to bond to the body tube and less total drag than a uniform cross section fin. The biggest problem is getting the plywood to bond to the G10. For some of my fins I laminated 2 - 3 layers of glass between the sheets of plywood before tapering to avoid the issues in bonding to fully cured G10 fiberglass. My most recent fins for a 75 mm rocket were composed of 1/16" G10 with alternate layers of carbon fiber and glass bonded to them to build the taper. The first was CF that went 1/4 of the span, the second was FG for 1/2 the span, third was 3/4 span CF, and finally full span FG. Both sides were laminated to the roughened G10 at once between sheets of 3/4" plywood covered with plastic and compressed with 6 hand screw clamps - probably around 100 - 150 psi on the fin surface. After clean up these were attached the BT with JB Weld using a discontinuous slot in the BT - 3 slots about 1/5 of the root edge length. A layer of vacuum bagged glass for tip to tip and then vacuum bagged a thinner layer of glass over the leading edge. This was the booster at BALLS and was simmed to hit about mach 1.3. The sustainer CATOed before I could find out if the fins made as listed in the first paragraph would handle mach 2+ (same tip to tip and leading edge glass). Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:42 PM To: Scott T Bowers; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Scott Berfield'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fin Flutter - was A gauntlet has been thrown... OK, dumb question Scott^2 and Fred. If I covered 1/8" G10 with a layer of 1/8" plywood on both sides, eploxied to the G10. Now 3/8th layered. Did I add strength, or did I just create more clutter falling to the ground? Cheers, Robert From sb at berfield.com Thu Oct 8 07:37:50 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:37:50 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: <200910081437.n98Ebqnb012320@omr14.networksolutionsemail.com> Sort of, but thinking more like a really dense energy absorbing material that would tend toabsorb vibration?rather than crushing or shattering. -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:24 PM To: 'Scott Berfield' ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Kinda like maybe a foam filled inter-wall gap to absorb energy? ;-) -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:15 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... One advantage I have is that I have no engineering education, limited math, and come from an arts background, so i can ask dumb questions and people cut me slack -- so here goes... any thought to a design that would allow some measure of fin flexure and vibration using energy absorbing materials to absorb the vibrations? Rather than fight to maintain total rigidity, design to dampen/absorb the energy rather than fight it to failure. No idea how one would do that, but it seems like with modern materials it should be feasible. One thought, for example -- a couple of failures I have seen looked like the fins vibrated so much that they shattered the tube -- attachment was not the issue -- the tube itself blew apart. We tend to rigidly anchor the fins to an internal structure (usually the motor mount and maybe centering rings) and then also to the outer tube wall. Would it be feasible to have a dense vibration absorbing material like a gasket in the fin slots to keep the fin from passing it's movement on to the tube wall and potentially causing a failure? -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 06:22 PM To: ''Robert Krausert'', ''Sam Grado'', raystoner99 at comcast.net, ''Cameron Tinder'', steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown.. Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this ?award?! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From MartyWeiser at comcast.net Thu Oct 8 07:44:03 2009 From: MartyWeiser at comcast.net (Marty Weiser) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:44:03 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <200910081437.n98Ebqnb012320@omr14.networksolutionsemail.com> References: <200910081437.n98Ebqnb012320@omr14.networksolutionsemail.com> Message-ID: <006101ca4825$c86d3330$59479990$@net> Perhaps aluminum? Compared to our composites it is ductile, and flexible so it will tend to absorb vibration rather than shattering. - Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:38 AM To: Fred Azinger; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Sort of, but thinking more like a really dense energy absorbing material that would tend toabsorb vibration?rather than crushing or shattering. -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:24 PM To: 'Scott Berfield' ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Kinda like maybe a foam filled inter-wall gap to absorb energy? ;-) -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:15 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... One advantage I have is that I have no engineering education, limited math, and come from an arts background, so i can ask dumb questions and people cut me slack -- so here goes... any thought to a design that would allow some measure of fin flexure and vibration using energy absorbing materials to absorb the vibrations? Rather than fight to maintain total rigidity, design to dampen/absorb the energy rather than fight it to failure. No idea how one would do that, but it seems like with modern materials it should be feasible. One thought, for example -- a couple of failures I have seen looked like the fins vibrated so much that they shattered the tube -- attachment was not the issue -- the tube itself blew apart. We tend to rigidly anchor the fins to an internal structure (usually the motor mount and maybe centering rings) and then also to the outer tube wall. Would it be feasible to have a dense vibration absorbing material like a gasket in the fin slots to keep the fin from passing it's movement on to the tube wall and potentially causing a failure? -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 06:22 PM To: ''Robert Krausert'', ''Sam Grado'', raystoner99 at comcast.net, ''Cameron Tinder'', steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown.. Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this ?award?! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From MartyWeiser at comcast.net Thu Oct 8 07:47:37 2009 From: MartyWeiser at comcast.net (Marty Weiser) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:47:37 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fin Flutter - was A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <200910081435.n98EZipO024586@omr15.networksolutionsemail.com> References: <200910081435.n98EZipO024586@omr15.networksolutionsemail.com> Message-ID: <006201ca4826$486fbd00$d94f3700$@net> Scott, I believe that putting the taper under the tip to tip will be better since it will result in a thicker root edge to the tube. In addition, the laminate to core joint will not be a continuous layer and less prone to the massive delamination that Bob observed on this BALLS flight made in a similar manner to yours. Marty -----Original Message----- From: Scott Berfield [mailto:sb at berfield.com] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:36 AM To: Marty Weiser; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Scott T Bowers'; 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Fin Flutter - was A gauntlet has been thrown... I did a low rent version of this on my L3 flight. It simmed that it would sit just below Mach for a bit so I was worried. Tube was 6" phenolic with s-glass wrap and the fins were G10. My solution was to do tip to tip s-glass, then half to half s-glass then 1/3 to 1/3 s-glass. This added noticeably to the stiffness and I had no issues and the slight taper helped damp things -----Original Message----- From: Marty Weiser Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:03 PM To: 'Robert Krausert' ; 'Scott T Bowers' ; 'Fred Azinger' ; 'Scott Berfield' ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Fin Flutter - was A gauntlet has been thrown... Robert, You have increased the strength, but also increased the drag. A more effective approach is to then sand the fins so they are 3/8" thick at the root and only 1/8" thick at the tip. You now have a structure with a much more complex vibration response that will be harder to excite. In addition, you have a larger area to bond to the body tube and less total drag than a uniform cross section fin. The biggest problem is getting the plywood to bond to the G10. For some of my fins I laminated 2 - 3 layers of glass between the sheets of plywood before tapering to avoid the issues in bonding to fully cured G10 fiberglass. My most recent fins for a 75 mm rocket were composed of 1/16" G10 with alternate layers of carbon fiber and glass bonded to them to build the taper. The first was CF that went 1/4 of the span, the second was FG for 1/2 the span, third was 3/4 span CF, and finally full span FG. Both sides were laminated to the roughened G10 at once between sheets of 3/4" plywood covered with plastic and compressed with 6 hand screw clamps - probably around 100 - 150 psi on the fin surface. After clean up these were attached the BT with JB Weld using a discontinuous slot in the BT - 3 slots about 1/5 of the root edge length. A layer of vacuum bagged glass for tip to tip and then vacuum bagged a thinner layer of glass over the leading edge. This was the booster at BALLS and was simmed to hit about mach 1.3. The sustainer CATOed before I could find out if the fins made as listed in the first paragraph would handle mach 2+ (same tip to tip and leading edge glass). Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:42 PM To: Scott T Bowers; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Scott Berfield'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fin Flutter - was A gauntlet has been thrown... OK, dumb question Scott^2 and Fred. If I covered 1/8" G10 with a layer of 1/8" plywood on both sides, eploxied to the G10. Now 3/8th layered. Did I add strength, or did I just create more clutter falling to the ground? Cheers, Robert From fred at azinger.com Thu Oct 8 07:56:00 2009 From: fred at azinger.com (Fred Azinger) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:56:00 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <00b101ca4822$c18de3f0$44a9abd0$@com> References: <570753.98419.qm@web52206.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4533C341F76E4FAC8C6013F70FC0ACE6@LaptopKrausert> <00b101ca4822$c18de3f0$44a9abd0$@com> Message-ID: <003d01ca4827$73dedbf0$5b9c93d0$@com> "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." Bob, This was your problem..... Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as fast as possible. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this ?award?! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Thu Oct 8 08:02:17 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 08:02:17 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fin Flutter - was A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: <200910081502.n98F2HmV017522@omr14.networksolutionsemail.com> Good points. -----Original Message----- From: Marty Weiser Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:47 AM To: 'Scott Berfield' ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Fin Flutter - was A gauntlet has been thrown... Scott, I believe that putting the taper under the tip to tip will be better since it will result in a thicker root edge to the tube. In addition, the laminate to core joint will not be a continuous layer and less prone to the massive delamination that Bob observed on this BALLS flight made in a similar manner to yours. Marty -----Original Message----- From: Scott Berfield [mailto:sb at berfield.com] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:36 AM To: Marty Weiser; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Scott T Bowers'; 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Fin Flutter - was A gauntlet has been thrown... I did a low rent version of this on my L3 flight. It simmed that it would sit just below Mach for a bit so I was worried. Tube was 6" phenolic with s-glass wrap and the fins were G10. My solution was to do tip to tip s-glass, then half to half s-glass then 1/3 to 1/3 s-glass. This added noticeably to the stiffness and I had no issues and the slight taper helped damp things -----Original Message----- From: Marty Weiser Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:03 PM To: 'Robert Krausert' ; 'Scott T Bowers' ; 'Fred Azinger' ; 'Scott Berfield' ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Fin Flutter - was A gauntlet has been thrown... Robert, You have increased the strength, but also increased the drag. A more effective approach is to then sand the fins so they are 3/8" thick at the root and only 1/8" thick at the tip. You now have a structure with a much more complex vibration response that will be harder to excite. In addition, you have a larger area to bond to the body tube and less total drag than a uniform cross section fin. The biggest problem is getting the plywood to bond to the G10. For some of my fins I laminated 2 - 3 layers of glass between the sheets of plywood before tapering to avoid the issues in bonding to fully cured G10 fiberglass. My most recent fins for a 75 mm rocket were composed of 1/16" G10 with alternate layers of carbon fiber and glass bonded to them to build the taper. The first was CF that went 1/4 of the span, the second was FG for 1/2 the span, third was 3/4 span CF, and finally full span FG. Both sides were laminated to the roughened G10 at once between sheets of 3/4" plywood covered with plastic and compressed with 6 hand screw clamps - probably around 100 - 150 psi on the fin surface. After clean up these were attached the BT with JB Weld using a discontinuous slot in the BT - 3 slots about 1/5 of the root edge length. A layer of vacuum bagged glass for tip to tip and then vacuum bagged a thinner layer of glass over the leading edge. This was the booster at BALLS and was simmed to hit about mach 1.3. The sustainer CATOed before I could find out if the fins made as listed in the first paragraph would handle mach 2+ (same tip to tip and leading edge glass). Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:42 PM To: Scott T Bowers; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Scott Berfield'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fin Flutter - was A gauntlet has been thrown... OK, dumb question Scott^2 and Fred. If I covered 1/8" G10 with a layer of 1/8" plywood on both sides, eploxied to the G10. Now 3/8th layered. Did I add strength, or did I just create more clutter falling to the ground? Cheers, Robert From kent.newman at comcast.net Thu Oct 8 08:31:41 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 08:31:41 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <003d01ca4827$73dedbf0$5b9c93d0$@com> References: <570753.98419.qm@web52206.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4533C341F76E4FAC8C6013F70FC0ACE6@LaptopKrausert> <00b101ca4822$c18de3f0$44a9abd0$@com> <003d01ca4827$73dedbf0$5b9c93d0$@com> Message-ID: <001501ca482c$702f7640$508e62c0$@newman@comcast.net> Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? K -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." Bob, This was your problem..... Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as fast as possible. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this ?award?! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From winningstad at comcast.net Thu Oct 8 08:34:02 2009 From: winningstad at comcast.net (Dennis S Winningstad) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 08:34:02 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <07ed01ca482c$d0c5df30$72519d90$@net> "... but people remember stuff like that for a long time." Gosh, Mike, just ask me about a certain two stage attempt I made YEARS ago :D Dennis S Winningstad 503-781-3529 -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Mfreptiles at aol.com Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:16 PM To: scott at scottsrockets.com; raystoner99 at comcast.net; tnetcenter at gmail.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust I did the same thing years ago. Ruined Roy's AirX rocket. Tried to use 400 micron AP in an erosive motor. Not good. No wonder nobody wants to fly my motors. Except Jack Caynon, brave soul. We've only shredded one so far. Aside from the coaxial motor failing to eject the core motor, my last cato was four or five years ago, but people remember stuff like that for a long time. Even I remember picking up pieces of Wilkerson's GPS from around my camp from Scott's cato. Stuff happens. Especially when you push the limits. Mike F. In a message dated 10/7/2009 7:56:57 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, scott at scottsrockets.com writes: Deputy and I made a tiny mistake on liquids a couple years ago and my motor confettied Wilkerson's brand new 98mm M bird and then the mistake almost got the Dawg Pack's test stand _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From ds at pacificrocketry.com Thu Oct 8 08:48:17 2009 From: ds at pacificrocketry.com (Denny Smith) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 08:48:17 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <63352.61251.qm@web82008.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <63352.61251.qm@web82008.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <007001ca482e$c21f5810$465e0830$@com> Paul...I'm having trouble seeing anything in your first post that even remotely has anything to do with range safety and TRA rules. If scolding the RSO and Tripoli board members was your goal, you did a rather poor job of it. I think what some here have a problem with is your flippant discount of the complexity and challenges that are present when designing and flying high-performance EX motors. I sure hope you actually manage to show up at Balls next year. I'm really looking forward to seeing your airframe designs and taking note of what I've been doing wrong. I'm always open to sound ideas and constructive input. -Denny -----Original Message----- From: The Sutchek's [mailto:sutchek at sbcglobal.net] Sent: None To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust AND SO? , after reading and re reading a few of the more interesting emails... I accept. ? but on a more serious note : the airframes and their inherent problems were ACTUALLY a side note to my main point of the people that were putting on BALLS allowing rockets to fly in unsafe conditons....and of the people that?" JUST HAD TO FLY " when conditions were not safe...?From what I know , there?was ?more than one Trippoli board member that?was ?at ?BALLS and they and the LCO allowed rockets to fly in conditions that are restricted by Trippoli rules ? cut and paste this: Weather The RSO must have clear and convincing evidence that the following constraints are not violated. 1. Do not launch if ground level winds exceed 20 mph. 2. Do not launch if the planned flight path will carry the vehicle through any clouds ? BUT any HOO ,,,, In a year we'll see whats up ! or not :) ? keep in touch !? - Paul _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Mfreptiles at aol.com Thu Oct 8 09:02:02 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 12:02:02 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: You mean the religious moment you recreated of the burning bush? :) Nah, we forgot about that a long time ago. Mike F. In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:35:55 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, winningstad at comcast.net writes: "... but people remember stuff like that for a long time." Gosh, Mike, just ask me about a certain two stage attempt I made YEARS ago :D Dennis S Winningstad 503-781-3529 From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Thu Oct 8 09:07:01 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (steve-c at ix.netcom.com) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 09:07:01 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: <29138012.1255018021845.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Kevlar exhibits good dampening characteristics at the expense of stiffness - maybe a mix of CF / Kelvar? /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Marty Weiser >Sent: Oct 8, 2009 7:44 AM >To: 'Scott Berfield' , 'Fred Azinger' , rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > >Perhaps aluminum? Compared to our composites it is ductile, and flexible so it will tend to absorb vibration rather than shattering. - Marty > >-----Original Message----- >From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield >Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:38 AM >To: Fred Azinger; rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > >Sort of, but thinking more like a really dense energy absorbing material that would tend toabsorb vibration?rather than crushing or shattering. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Fred Azinger >Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:24 PM >To: 'Scott Berfield' ; rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > >Kinda like maybe a foam filled inter-wall gap to absorb energy? ;-) > > >-----Original Message----- >From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield >Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:15 PM >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > >One advantage I have is that I have no engineering education, limited math, and come from an arts background, so i can ask dumb questions and people cut me slack -- so here goes... > >any thought to a design that would allow some measure of fin flexure and vibration using energy absorbing materials to absorb the vibrations? Rather than fight to maintain total rigidity, design to dampen/absorb the energy rather than fight it to failure. No idea how one would do that, but it seems like with modern materials it should be feasible. > >One thought, for example -- a couple of failures I have seen looked like the fins vibrated so much that they shattered the tube -- attachment was not the issue -- the tube itself blew apart. We tend to rigidly anchor the fins to an internal structure (usually the motor mount and maybe centering rings) and then also to the outer tube wall. Would it be feasible to have a dense vibration absorbing material like a gasket in the fin slots to keep the fin from passing it's movement on to the tube wall and potentially causing a failure? >-----Original Message----- >From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] >Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 06:22 PM >To: ''Robert Krausert'', ''Sam Grado'', raystoner99 at comcast.net, ''Cameron Tinder'', >steve-c at ix.netcom.com >Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > >Shreds are, IMHO, caused by the product of time and energy.... The more your fins vibrate or the longer your fins vibrate the close to death you dance Rockets like Roberts shred on a slow-boosting K250 mainly due to the time spent in the transonic region where aerodynamic effects are peak.... The same rocket likely survived quick punches to mach and back.... Reminds me of my puzzlement over why people crawl through traffic intersections when it is their turn....get you but through that intersection....that's where the accidents happen.... Sorry -- I digress -- but same deal -- get through the transonic region ASAP for best results. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown.. Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this ?award?! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From Mfreptiles at aol.com Thu Oct 8 09:07:30 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 12:07:30 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: Maybe you should take that up with the BOD and launch organizers and let us know how that goes. I've got a 54mm motor for you if you have the balls to fly it. :) Mike F. In a message dated 10/8/2009 12:01:07 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: >From what I know , there was more than one Trippoli board member that was at BALLS and they and the LCO allowed rockets to fly in conditions that are restricted by Trippoli rules From fred at azinger.com Thu Oct 8 09:17:12 2009 From: fred at azinger.com (Fred Azinger) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 09:17:12 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Message-ID: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... FredA From sb at berfield.com Thu Oct 8 09:23:28 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 16:23:28 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: Would love to see one of these go up --but maybe 'see' would be an exaggeration. Maybe we need to invest in a super high speed camera. -----Original Message----- From: Robert Krausert [mailto:lawndart.robert at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 08:38 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com, scott at scottsrockets.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net, tnetcenter at gmail.com, rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Mike,You say that so relaxed. I remember when I pushed the button for your 38mm L. You were over to the East, going -"yah, ya, go ahead - no worries." While we all stood there seeing a rocket beat a 9mm bullet in a drag race. Zero to mach two, I wonder if you broke military records. And you're still over there, "hmm. That looked ok." And we are all wiping the kitty litter off our chins after they dropped to the ground.AND you only lost one fin. Fred once us to clear the intersection, but your vehicle. No one saw it coming, saw an aluminum trace, and never saw it leave. Next time I go shooting pistols, I'll simply shoot... Yep, it was faster. Shoot... Yep, it was faster..Cheers,Robert----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; ; ; Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:16 PMSubject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust>I did the same thing years ago. Ruined Roy's AirX rocket. Tried to use> 400 micron AP in an erosive motor. Not good.>> No wonder nobody wants to fly my motors. Except Jack Caynon, brave soul.> We've only shredded one so far. Aside from the coaxial motor failing to> eject the core motor, my last cato was four or five years ago, but people> remember stuff like that for a long time. Even I remember picking up > pieces> of Wilkerson's GPS from around my camp from Scott's cato.>> Stuff happens. Especially when you push the limits.>> Mike F.>>> In a message dated 10/7/2009 7:56:57 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,> scott at scottsrockets.com writes:>> Deputy and I made a tiny> mistake on liquids a couple years ago and my motor confettied Wilkerson's> brand new 98mm M bird and then the mistake almost got the Dawg Pack's > test> stand>> _______________________________________________> Rockets mailing list> Rockets at rocketsnw.com> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets> _______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Thu Oct 8 09:25:15 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (steve-c at ix.netcom.com) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 09:25:15 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: <22977303.1255019116147.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Actually, the OP has a good point about the "go-fever" mentality at these launches. Think about it - months in the planning, the rocket is racked and ready to go - most flyers don't have the discipline to abort just because the wind picks up a bit or the backup electronics are faulty - discipline such as I've witnessed from the likes of Stu, Marty and Adrian is hard to come by. The organizers are put in an uncomfortable position as well and relent a bit perhaps on the rules to likely demonstrate lessons for others to learn from. It becomes a crap-shoot with a heavy reliance on luck and some flyers (including myself) are okay with that. /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Mfreptiles at aol.com >Sent: Oct 8, 2009 9:07 AM >To: sutchek at sbcglobal.net, Rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > >Maybe you should take that up with the BOD and launch organizers and let us > know how that goes. > >I've got a 54mm motor for you if you have the balls to fly it. :) > >Mike F. > > >In a message dated 10/8/2009 12:01:07 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: > >>From what I know , there was more than one Trippoli board member that >was at BALLS and they and the LCO allowed rockets to fly in conditions that >are restricted by Trippoli rules > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Thu Oct 8 09:22:49 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 09:22:49 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted In-Reply-To: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> References: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> Message-ID: That's should have been named Crater Maker instead of Snap Ring...LOL On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Fred Azinger wrote: > I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... > > FredA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From sb at berfield.com Thu Oct 8 09:31:40 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 16:31:40 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fin flutter Message-ID: Avoiding it int eh first place is great where possible. I think one thing that we run into though, is that in the case of rockets built in garages using readily available tools and materials and limited ability to do serious analysis, it might be a case that designs that have tolerance built in might be more feasible than deisngs that require extreme precision and fabrication techniques that are not readily avaialble. On the other hand, I might jsut be lazy :) -----Original Message----- From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 11:28 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Fin flutter This discussion of fin design reminded me of a high school friend whobuilt a toy car with square wheels. It is indeed possible to use squarewheels with a suspension designed to result in a smooth ride. That washis point. But it's easier to use round wheels.The best way to deal with fin flutter is to not allow it in the firstplace. And as the masters of rocketry have pointed out here, that ain'teasy and requires thought and practice. Fin design for high performancerockets is still an evolving art. More art than science.+McG+_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Thu Oct 8 09:36:42 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 16:36:42 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Message-ID: Scary, but in kind of a cool way. That impact was pretty damned impressive. -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2009 09:17 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild......FredA _______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From ds at pacificrocketry.com Thu Oct 8 09:39:20 2009 From: ds at pacificrocketry.com (Denny Smith) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 09:39:20 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted In-Reply-To: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> References: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> Message-ID: <007201ca4835$e3187d60$a9497820$@com> How dare you! :) Denny -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger [mailto:fred at azinger.com] Sent: None To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... FredA _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From greg at blastzone.com Thu Oct 8 09:56:57 2009 From: greg at blastzone.com (Greg Deputy) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 09:56:57 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted In-Reply-To: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> References: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> Message-ID: <159d01ca4838$593a93a0$0bafbae0$@com> Holy Crap! Kent, Denny and Brad, I had no idea you had moved to anti tank kinetic penetrators, yikes! Nice video. > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On > Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted > > I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... > > FredA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From robert.krausert at intel.com Thu Oct 8 10:01:49 2009 From: robert.krausert at intel.com (Krausert, Robert) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 10:01:49 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <22977303.1255019116147.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <22977303.1255019116147.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E439A87FB@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> True. But as an FSO approving flights, all you can do is ask question about the rocket, prepareness, flight sims, aerodynamics, etc. Motor versus the rocket, over powered, under powered, over stable (weather cocking). But if I grabbed one of the fins and started bending it back and forth to guage flutter at transonic speed; I'd likely end up with a black eye. And don't blame the LCO. They shouldn't be the one approving the flight. Unless you're short staffed and FSO & LCO are the same person. The LCO should be paying attention to your rocket when it launches. LCO should be the one keeping flights below the cloud deck, monitoring deployments, keeping specators safe & alerted, and making sure rockets are not stuck in airplanes. Cheers, Robert -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of steve-c at ix.netcom.com Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:25 AM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; sutchek at sbcglobal.net; Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Actually, the OP has a good point about the "go-fever" mentality at these launches. Think about it - months in the planning, the rocket is racked and ready to go - most flyers don't have the discipline to abort just because the wind picks up a bit or the backup electronics are faulty - discipline such as I've witnessed from the likes of Stu, Marty and Adrian is hard to come by. The organizers are put in an uncomfortable position as well and relent a bit perhaps on the rules to likely demonstrate lessons for others to learn from. It becomes a crap-shoot with a heavy reliance on luck and some flyers (including myself) are okay with that. /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Mfreptiles at aol.com >Sent: Oct 8, 2009 9:07 AM >To: sutchek at sbcglobal.net, Rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > >Maybe you should take that up with the BOD and launch organizers and let us > know how that goes. > >I've got a 54mm motor for you if you have the balls to fly it. :) > >Mike F. > > >In a message dated 10/8/2009 12:01:07 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: > >>From what I know , there was more than one Trippoli board member that >was at BALLS and they and the LCO allowed rockets to fly in conditions that >are restricted by Trippoli rules > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From winningstad at comcast.net Thu Oct 8 10:14:39 2009 From: winningstad at comcast.net (Dennis S Winningstad) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 10:14:39 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted In-Reply-To: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> References: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> Message-ID: <082d01ca483a$d1c98b30$755ca190$@net> Rick Clap and Mike Moore did an EXCELLENT job..YA-HOOOOOOOOOOO Dennis S Winningstad 503-781-3529 -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... FredA _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From ds at pacificrocketry.com Thu Oct 8 10:18:05 2009 From: ds at pacificrocketry.com (Denny Smith) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 10:18:05 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted In-Reply-To: <159d01ca4838$593a93a0$0bafbae0$@com> References: <159d01ca4838$593a93a0$0bafbae0$@com> Message-ID: <007301ca483b$4cb08e70$e611ab50$@com> Sure...real funny! Actually, that was Kent, Jim, and Denny. I figure Brad doesn't want to be lumped in with this one. Denny -----Original Message----- From: Greg Deputy [mailto:greg at blastzone.com] Sent: None To: 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Holy Crap! Kent, Denny and Brad, I had no idea you had moved to anti tank kinetic penetrators, yikes! Nice video. > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On > Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted > > I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... > > FredA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From fred.azinger at intel.com Thu Oct 8 10:26:56 2009 From: fred.azinger at intel.com (Azinger, Fred) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 10:26:56 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted In-Reply-To: <007301ca483b$4cb08e70$e611ab50$@com> References: <159d01ca4838$593a93a0$0bafbae0$@com> <007301ca483b$4cb08e70$e611ab50$@com> Message-ID: OK -- then I apologize for the title.............. Do you want me to edit the video with the correct participants properly attributed? Let me know -- can fix tonight (need to do from home) -- I'm sure Greg will help me update the file or I'll just add another post. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Denny Smith Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:18 AM To: 'Greg Deputy'; 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Sure...real funny! Actually, that was Kent, Jim, and Denny. I figure Brad doesn't want to be lumped in with this one. Denny -----Original Message----- From: Greg Deputy [mailto:greg at blastzone.com] Sent: None To: 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Holy Crap! Kent, Denny and Brad, I had no idea you had moved to anti tank kinetic penetrators, yikes! Nice video. > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On > Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted > > I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... > > FredA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From ds at pacificrocketry.com Thu Oct 8 10:36:19 2009 From: ds at pacificrocketry.com (Denny Smith) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 10:36:19 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <007401ca483d$d88cee00$89a6ca00$@com> I don't think it matters, Fred. Thanks for posting the video, though. Denny -----Original Message----- From: Azinger, Fred [mailto:fred.azinger at intel.com] Sent: None To: Denny Smith; 'Greg Deputy'; 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Video Posted OK -- then I apologize for the title.............. Do you want me to edit the video with the correct participants properly attributed? Let me know -- can fix tonight (need to do from home) -- I'm sure Greg will help me update the file or I'll just add another post. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Denny Smith Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:18 AM To: 'Greg Deputy'; 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Sure...real funny! Actually, that was Kent, Jim, and Denny. I figure Brad doesn't want to be lumped in with this one. Denny -----Original Message----- From: Greg Deputy [mailto:greg at blastzone.com] Sent: None To: 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Holy Crap! Kent, Denny and Brad, I had no idea you had moved to anti tank kinetic penetrators, yikes! Nice video. > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On > Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted > > I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... > > FredA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From fred.azinger at intel.com Thu Oct 8 10:39:42 2009 From: fred.azinger at intel.com (Azinger, Fred) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 10:39:42 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted In-Reply-To: <007401ca483d$d88cee00$89a6ca00$@com> References: <007401ca483d$d88cee00$89a6ca00$@com> Message-ID: Thx Denny, It was another "cool flight at Balls" with a sad outcome. I feel your pain. Glad that Mike is pretty handy with his camcorder. Do you guys know what went wrong? Simulation error? Airframe issues? Any idea? FredA -----Original Message----- From: Denny Smith [mailto:ds at pacificrocketry.com] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:36 AM To: Azinger, Fred; 'Greg Deputy'; 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Video Posted I don't think it matters, Fred. Thanks for posting the video, though. Denny -----Original Message----- From: Azinger, Fred [mailto:fred.azinger at intel.com] Sent: None To: Denny Smith; 'Greg Deputy'; 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Video Posted OK -- then I apologize for the title.............. Do you want me to edit the video with the correct participants properly attributed? Let me know -- can fix tonight (need to do from home) -- I'm sure Greg will help me update the file or I'll just add another post. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Denny Smith Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:18 AM To: 'Greg Deputy'; 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Sure...real funny! Actually, that was Kent, Jim, and Denny. I figure Brad doesn't want to be lumped in with this one. Denny -----Original Message----- From: Greg Deputy [mailto:greg at blastzone.com] Sent: None To: 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Holy Crap! Kent, Denny and Brad, I had no idea you had moved to anti tank kinetic penetrators, yikes! Nice video. > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On > Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted > > I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... > > FredA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Thu Oct 8 11:05:29 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 18:05:29 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: I think we all do that, not just EX-guys. Haven't seen all that many shreds at the commercial launches I have been at, but haver seen a lot of dumb mistakes lead to failed recoveries. One large complex project ont eh ex day at XPRS failed because a jumper on one of the altimeters was in the wrong place. Easy mistake to make - but could have been avoided by a checklist and having backup people to check things. Then there is forgetting to set a mach delay, cross wiring the charges, feeling like you probably did somethign wrong but flying anyway... I am trying to get to the same state of mind as on a climb -- the up is only half the trip, and a little OCD in teh prep will pay off. But it is hard. -----Original Message----- From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2009 09:25 AM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com, sutchek at sbcglobal.net, Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Actually, the OP has a good point about the "go-fever" mentality at these launches. Think about it - months in the planning, the rocket is racked and ready to go - most flyers don't have the discipline to abort just because the wind picks up a bit or the backup electronics are faulty - discipline such as I've witnessed from the likes of Stu, Marty and Adrian is hard to come by. The organizers are put in an uncomfortable position as well and relent a bit perhaps on the rules to likely demonstrate lessons for others to learn from. It becomes a crap-shoot with a heavy reliance on luck and some flyers (including myself) are okay with that. /Steve-----Original Message----->From: Mfreptiles at aol.com>Sent: Oct 8, 2009 9:07 AM>To: sutchek at sbcglobal.net, Rockets at rocketsnw.com>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust>>Maybe you should take that up with the BOD and launch organizers and let us > know how that goes.> >I've got a 54mm motor for you if you have the balls to fly it. :)> >Mike F.> > >In a message dated 10/8/2009 12:01:07 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes:>>>From what I know , there was more than one Trippoli board member that >was at BALLS and they and the LCO allowed rockets to fly in conditions that >are restricted by Trippoli rules>>_______________________________________________>Rockets mailing list>Rockets at rocketsnw.com>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets> _______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From kent.newman at comcast.net Thu Oct 8 11:17:42 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 11:17:42 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted In-Reply-To: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> References: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> Message-ID: <000901ca4843$a0e45e10$e2ad1a30$@newman@comcast.net> Nice video, Mike. Obviously, not a traditional track to follow but you did it very well :-) S&H was always marginal at best even when boosting successfully at BALLS two years ago. It's an all aluminum booster and all composite sustainer. We made some motor changes this year, and, although with a bit less stability as a result, we decided to fly it. Interestingly enough, S&H was used as a test case for the Class 3 dispersion analysis process when aero software was being tried out last spring. Chuck Rogers ran it on Missile DATCOM and got right back to me with the diagnosis that it was unstable. I used Barrowman calcs, and, although marginally stable, added the fact that we had a previously successful flight to support trying it again. We decided to go ahead with it as a test case. I....was.....wrong! We have a year to determine the differences between the two measures of stability, but, obviously, Missile DATCOM and RASAero (for single stage projects and heavily modeled after MD) have my attention in any final analysis. I have only to hope that Chuck can take a break from the Aeries escape tower and capsule project and add staged vehicles to his software. Truthfully, I expected wiggle during the boost but nothing like what actually happened! Talk about a "playa penetrator". I've seen other rockets (staged and otherwise) go unstable (even doing loops) while I sought refuge under the nearest motorhome :-) I never expected to be the source of such a missile, though. I can be thankful that only the playa suffered the result of a hit under full thrust. The min dia project was a 114mm "O" to a 98mm "M". The sustainer disintegrated into thousands of shards of composite pieces and simultaneously peeled the AT motor case into aluminum strips while adding the propellant to the debris field of fiberglass, aluminum and propellant. The booster was partially sticking out of the playa about 3' with another 4' of the forward end mushroomed and curled into all sorts of little curly pieces of Al 3" and 4" long throughout the crater. Electronics boards were pieces, batteries were smashed flat, etc. The impact kicked chunks of playa straight up into the air where they fell like little bomblets into the debris field 100'-125' out in a semi-circle. They fell pretty much straight down leaving little impact circles and little playa columns sticking straight up into the air. Looked weird. Historically, I've always taken a pretty conservative route in design and launch attempts. I suspect that might be something I'll get right back to :-) Kent -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... FredA _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Thu Oct 8 11:50:50 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (steve-c at ix.netcom.com) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 11:50:50 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Message-ID: <14629081.1255027850208.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Yikes! The (2) characters seen standing way too close near the launch platform were me and Hal - talk about a pucker factor flight. Great video w/ a bummer result, but you can bet that Kent and company will be back to do it right next time. /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Fred Azinger >Sent: Oct 8, 2009 9:17 AM >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted > >I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... > >FredA > > > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From bradwr at wrightholdings.com Thu Oct 8 12:01:59 2009 From: bradwr at wrightholdings.com (Brad Wright) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 19:01:59 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted In-Reply-To: <007401ca483d$d88cee00$89a6ca00$@com> References: , <007401ca483d$d88cee00$89a6ca00$@com> Message-ID: <3A117F0D50887C4EAA3B35717ADE209914EF19C1@BL2PRD0102MB003.prod.exchangelabs.com> Nope no worries by me. Glad someone got video I wasn't out with my camera for that one, prep'ing Panther Paws. Think I'm going to go re-sim some projects....... thx for the post b ________________________________________ From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] on behalf of Denny Smith [ds at pacificrocketry.com] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:36 AM To: 'Azinger, Fred'; 'Greg Deputy'; 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted I don't think it matters, Fred. Thanks for posting the video, though. Denny -----Original Message----- From: Azinger, Fred [mailto:fred.azinger at intel.com] Sent: None To: Denny Smith; 'Greg Deputy'; 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Video Posted OK -- then I apologize for the title.............. Do you want me to edit the video with the correct participants properly attributed? Let me know -- can fix tonight (need to do from home) -- I'm sure Greg will help me update the file or I'll just add another post. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Denny Smith Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:18 AM To: 'Greg Deputy'; 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Sure...real funny! Actually, that was Kent, Jim, and Denny. I figure Brad doesn't want to be lumped in with this one. Denny -----Original Message----- From: Greg Deputy [mailto:greg at blastzone.com] Sent: None To: 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Holy Crap! Kent, Denny and Brad, I had no idea you had moved to anti tank kinetic penetrators, yikes! Nice video. > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On > Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted > > I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... > > FredA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From scott at scottsrockets.com Thu Oct 8 14:00:29 2009 From: scott at scottsrockets.com (Scott T Bowers) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 14:00:29 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted In-Reply-To: <000901ca4843$a0e45e10$e2ad1a30$@newman@comcast.net> References: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> <000901ca4843$a0e45e10$e2ad1a30$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: Looks like it may have burned off enough to go stable before the rush to the playa. Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Kent Newman Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 11:18 AM To: 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Nice video, Mike. Obviously, not a traditional track to follow but you did it very well :-) S&H was always marginal at best even when boosting successfully at BALLS two years ago. It's an all aluminum booster and all composite sustainer. We made some motor changes this year, and, although with a bit less stability as a result, we decided to fly it. Interestingly enough, S&H was used as a test case for the Class 3 dispersion analysis process when aero software was being tried out last spring. Chuck Rogers ran it on Missile DATCOM and got right back to me with the diagnosis that it was unstable. I used Barrowman calcs, and, although marginally stable, added the fact that we had a previously successful flight to support trying it again. We decided to go ahead with it as a test case. I....was.....wrong! We have a year to determine the differences between the two measures of stability, but, obviously, Missile DATCOM and RASAero (for single stage projects and heavily modeled after MD) have my attention in any final analysis. I have only to hope that Chuck can take a break from the Aeries escape tower and capsule project and add staged vehicles to his software. Truthfully, I expected wiggle during the boost but nothing like what actually happened! Talk about a "playa penetrator". I've seen other rockets (staged and otherwise) go unstable (even doing loops) while I sought refuge under the nearest motorhome :-) I never expected to be the source of such a missile, though. I can be thankful that only the playa suffered the result of a hit under full thrust. The min dia project was a 114mm "O" to a 98mm "M". The sustainer disintegrated into thousands of shards of composite pieces and simultaneously peeled the AT motor case into aluminum strips while adding the propellant to the debris field of fiberglass, aluminum and propellant. The booster was partially sticking out of the playa about 3' with another 4' of the forward end mushroomed and curled into all sorts of little curly pieces of Al 3" and 4" long throughout the crater. Electronics boards were pieces, batteries were smashed flat, etc. The impact kicked chunks of playa straight up into the air where they fell like little bomblets into the debris field 100'-125' out in a semi-circle. They fell pretty much straight down leaving little impact circles and little playa columns sticking straight up into the air. Looked weird. Historically, I've always taken a pretty conservative route in design and launch attempts. I suspect that might be something I'll get right back to :-) Kent -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... FredA _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From clappfamily at comcast.net Thu Oct 8 14:51:43 2009 From: clappfamily at comcast.net (clappfamily at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 21:51:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1938836732.1230971255038703343.JavaMail.root@sz0014a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> I'm glad it did it then instead of when it was pointing toward me!? :-) Rick ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott T Bowers" To: "Kent Newman" , "Fred Azinger" , rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2009 2:00:29 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Looks like it may have burned off enough to go stable before the rush to the playa. Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com ? -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Kent Newman Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 11:18 AM To: 'Fred Azinger'; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted Nice video, Mike. ?Obviously, not a traditional track to follow but you did it very well :-) S&H was always marginal at best even when boosting successfully at BALLS two years ago. ?It's an all aluminum booster and all composite sustainer. ?We made some motor changes this year, and, although with a bit less stability as a result, we decided to fly it. Interestingly enough, S&H was used as a test case for the Class 3 dispersion analysis process when aero software was being tried out last spring. ?Chuck Rogers ran it on Missile DATCOM and got right back to me with the diagnosis that it was unstable. ?I used Barrowman calcs, and, although marginally stable, added the fact that we had a previously successful flight to support trying it again. ?We decided to go ahead with it as a test case. I....was.....wrong! We have a year to determine the differences between the two measures of stability, but, obviously, Missile DATCOM and RASAero (for single stage projects and heavily modeled after MD) have my attention in any final analysis. ?I have only to hope that Chuck can take a break from the Aeries escape tower and capsule project and add staged vehicles to his software. Truthfully, I expected wiggle during the boost but nothing like what actually happened! ?Talk about a "playa penetrator". ?I've seen other rockets (staged and otherwise) go unstable (even doing loops) while I sought refuge under the nearest motorhome :-) ?I never expected to be the source of such a missile, though. ?I can be thankful that only the playa suffered the result of a hit under full thrust. The min dia project was a 114mm "O" to a 98mm "M". ?The sustainer disintegrated into thousands of shards of composite pieces and simultaneously peeled the AT motor case into aluminum strips while adding the propellant to the debris field of fiberglass, aluminum and propellant. The booster was partially sticking out of the playa about 3' with another 4' of the forward end mushroomed and curled into all sorts of little curly pieces of Al 3" and 4" long throughout the crater. ?Electronics boards were pieces, batteries were smashed flat, etc. ?The impact kicked chunks of playa straight up into the air where they fell like little bomblets into the debris field 100'-125' out in a semi-circle. ?They fell pretty much straight down leaving little impact circles and little playa columns sticking straight up into the air. ?Looked weird. ? ? Historically, I've always taken a pretty conservative route in design and launch attempts. ?I suspect that might be something I'll get right back to :-) Kent -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... FredA ? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ?? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ?? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ?? From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Thu Oct 8 16:22:21 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 16:22:21 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] NAR L2 Cert Team Needed For Rocketober! Message-ID: I am going to be ready to take the test and attempt an L2 Cert flight for Rocketober at Brothers Oregon. I am wondering if there wil bee anyone there to give me the test and Cert my flight? From glech at aol.com Thu Oct 8 17:17:30 2009 From: glech at aol.com (Gary Lech) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 17:17:30 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] I also need a Cert Team For Rocketober! References: Message-ID: I'm also in need of a cert officer for my L1 preferably TRA but I can do NAR if necessary. Thanks, Gary Lech - WA7GL From bigredbee at gmail.com Thu Oct 8 17:19:17 2009 From: bigredbee at gmail.com (Greg Clark) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 17:19:17 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] I also need a Cert Team For Rocketober! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I plan to be there for the weekend to do my TRA duties. On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Gary Lech wrote: > I'm also in need of a cert officer for my L1 preferably TRA but I can do NAR > if necessary. > > Thanks, > Gary Lech - WA7GL > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From fred at azinger.com Thu Oct 8 18:46:28 2009 From: fred at azinger.com (Fred Azinger) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 18:46:28 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail video posted Message-ID: <003101ca4882$52046ad0$f60d4070$@com> It's a large file -- 220MByte. Make sure you watch till almost the 4 minute mark (~3:52) ....worth the wait IMHO. From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Thu Oct 8 19:19:40 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 19:19:40 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail video posted In-Reply-To: <003101ca4882$52046ad0$f60d4070$@com> References: <003101ca4882$52046ad0$f60d4070$@com> Message-ID: Insane download time but well worth the wait! Love the Hart. Little more editing and it will be an awesome video. On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Fred Azinger wrote: > It's a large file -- 220MByte. > > Make sure you watch till almost the 4 minute mark (~3:52) ....worth the > wait > IMHO. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From sutchek at sbcglobal.net Thu Oct 8 20:08:52 2009 From: sutchek at sbcglobal.net (The Sutchek's) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 20:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <22977303.1255019116147.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <212096.31451.qm@web82001.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Also to add , I didn't want no bad blood either !? But as it seems either I'm an easy guy to jump on or I hit close to home,,, I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE , and as I read my post ,,, I was asking questions about .... ? What type of load are all of you talking about? ? , what area of g forces + or - ,,, ???? and more importantly what motor classes with such airframes . ? As some of you put it we all learn from each other.... I was asking questions and some of them related to the failure rate and some of them referanced the " FEVER " to launch in inclimate weather.... any way ... I'm kinda done with this , the motor is forthcoming ,,, I've got work to do ,,, and we too shall meet? again.... ? Keep on , keepin on, ? -Paul Sutchek , TRA , NAR Lvl 3? oh yeah , and I love beer too ! --- On Thu, 10/8/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust To: Mfreptiles at aol.com, sutchek at sbcglobal.net, Rockets at rocketsnw.com Date: Thursday, October 8, 2009, 9:25 AM Actually, the OP has a good point about the "go-fever" mentality at these launches.? Think about it - months in the planning, the rocket is racked and ready to go - most flyers don't have the discipline to abort just because the wind picks up a bit or the backup electronics are faulty - discipline such as I've witnessed from the likes of Stu, Marty and Adrian is hard to come by.? The organizers are put in an uncomfortable position as well and relent a bit perhaps on the rules to likely demonstrate lessons for others to learn from.? It becomes a crap-shoot with a heavy reliance on luck and some flyers (including myself) are okay with that.? /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Mfreptiles at aol.com >Sent: Oct 8, 2009 9:07 AM >To: sutchek at sbcglobal.net, Rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > >Maybe you should take that up with the BOD and launch organizers and let us > know how that goes. > >I've got a 54mm motor for you if you have the balls to fly it. :) > >Mike F. > > >In a message dated 10/8/2009 12:01:07 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,? >sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: > >>From? what I know , there was? more than one Trippoli board member? that >was? at? BALLS and they and the LCO allowed rockets to fly? in conditions that >are restricted by Trippoli? rules > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >? From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Thu Oct 8 20:20:45 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 20:20:45 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail video posted References: <003101ca4882$52046ad0$f60d4070$@com> Message-ID: <847548553E5445FEAB7DC32BC185CD38@LaptopKrausert> Oh Fred... Lets first say this has been a long hour week. Meetings at midnight, 6am, and one 18 hour day. Next let me mention your website. I pull up a browser and go to Azinger dot com, and click on rockets. Then all of a suddend, I heard a noise. My headphones are sitting on my workbench to the left. I figured my cell phone was ringing. My noisy ring tone. Picked it up and nothing there. Phone back in my pocket and continue thinking about the noise. Then I hear a noise coming from under the table. A strange, scary "wooooshhhh" sound. Now I'm convinced I've got a big bee under the bench. Foaming bee spray in hand, I'm ready. Then I hear it again, this time near the top of the workbench. I reach over and take care of priority. I grab my smokes and my open beer. And moved away, and ready to spray. The wooooshing sound continued. Then I began to think and reached over and put the headphone on. Nothing. About when I was ready to take them off, WOOOOSSHHHH!!!!. No skidmarks. But likely close, because I was still looking for that bee. Fred, I nearly spilled my beer. Let me say great video and website. BUT please warn us or at least me that your web site has auto-run video and audio. With bee kill foam can in hand, and beer... Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Azinger" To: Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 6:46 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail video posted > It's a large file -- 220MByte. > > Make sure you watch till almost the 4 minute mark (~3:52) ....worth the > wait > IMHO. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From jhadv at pacifier.com Thu Oct 8 20:26:33 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (jhadv at pacifier.com) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 20:26:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <28787.76.115.45.22.1255058793.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> All; I just had a chance to watch the video Fred posted. Great video. However, is there any sophisticated reason for a rocket behaving like that? The only one I can think of is it was unstable at the tower before launch. If it was unstable at the tower then that's a bit of a problem isn't is? From bigredbee at gmail.com Thu Oct 8 20:29:56 2009 From: bigredbee at gmail.com (Greg Clark) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 20:29:56 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] October Brothers plans Message-ID: So, in June at Brothers, I stripped the fins (and the nose cone and the body tube and the rail buttons) off of my 54mm min diameter rocket with an Aerotech Mojave Green K805. Fred got a great picture, perhaps he can share a small version? I'll be trying again next weekend -- this time, with some better fin attachment techniques! Long term wx outlook looks good, fingers crossed! -- Greg From fred at azinger.com Thu Oct 8 21:54:24 2009 From: fred at azinger.com (Fred Azinger) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 21:54:24 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED In-Reply-To: <28787.76.115.45.22.1255058793.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> References: <28787.76.115.45.22.1255058793.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> Message-ID: <004b01ca489c$93345960$b99d0c20$@com> UPSIDE-DOWN Altimeter..... Satisfied ACC<0; VEL<0 and ALT References: Message-ID: <4ACEC2F3.6080105@comcast.net> It looks like I won't be going to Rocketober. I have too many other things going on that same weekend here in town. Thanks to some quick action by Trip Barber at NAR HQ, I now have PDF versions of the 2009 L2 exams. If you want to take the exam here in the Portland area sometime this weekend or next week - before going to Brothers - please contact me directly and we'll try to arrange a time and place. If you'd rather take the exam at Brothers, I can send exams in either electronic or hardcopy form to someone who can administer the test there. -Steve Tarr Christopher Guenther wrote: > I am going to be ready to take the test and attempt an L2 Cert flight for > Rocketober at Brothers Oregon. I am wondering if there wil bee anyone there > to give me the test and Cert my flight? > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From Mfreptiles at aol.com Thu Oct 8 22:22:44 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 01:22:44 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your intent, but that's the way it reads. Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly but am burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know before someone else speaks for it. Mike F. In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Thu Oct 8 22:58:47 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 22:58:47 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust References: Message-ID: Mike, It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your 54mm motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it during an EX day next year. Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters if you have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; ; Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your intent, > but that's the way it reads. > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly but am > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know before > someone else speaks for it. > > Mike F. > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Thu Oct 8 23:02:28 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 23:02:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted In-Reply-To: <082d01ca483a$d1c98b30$755ca190$@net> References: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> <082d01ca483a$d1c98b30$755ca190$@net> Message-ID: I move that at the next OROC meeting we officially hand Dennis' two-stage crash crown to Kent & Co and absolve Dennis of all notoriety, eh? :) Then they can hand it off to NASA! +McG+ > Rick Clap and Mike Moore did an EXCELLENT job..YA-HOOOOOOOOOOO > > Dennis S Winningstad > 503-781-3529 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted > > I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... > > FredA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Thu Oct 8 23:15:28 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 23:15:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted In-Reply-To: <000901ca4843$a0e45e10$e2ad1a30$@newman@comcast.net> References: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> <000901ca4843$a0e45e10$e2ad1a30$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: Now see this is the kind of failure I'd expect at a premier amateur launch: Differences between different sims, discrepancies between the sims and previous actual flights, and what in the perfection of hindsight was a bad call made on the differing input. Not at all like reinventing old, well-known failure modes of things like fin integrity or the effects of thermal expansion on tight-margin cylindrical couplers. Better luck next year Kent! +McG+ > Nice video, Mike. Obviously, not a traditional track to follow but you > did > it very well :-) > > S&H was always marginal at best even when boosting successfully at BALLS > two > years ago. It's an all aluminum booster and all composite sustainer. We > made some motor changes this year, and, although with a bit less stability > as a result, we decided to fly it. > > Interestingly enough, S&H was used as a test case for the Class 3 > dispersion > analysis process when aero software was being tried out last spring. > Chuck > Rogers ran it on Missile DATCOM and got right back to me with the > diagnosis > that it was unstable. I used Barrowman calcs, and, although marginally > stable, added the fact that we had a previously successful flight to > support > trying it again. We decided to go ahead with it as a test case. > > I....was.....wrong! > > We have a year to determine the differences between the two measures of > stability, but, obviously, Missile DATCOM and RASAero (for single stage > projects and heavily modeled after MD) have my attention in any final > analysis. I have only to hope that Chuck can take a break from the Aeries > escape tower and capsule project and add staged vehicles to his software. > > Truthfully, I expected wiggle during the boost but nothing like what > actually happened! Talk about a "playa penetrator". I've seen other > rockets (staged and otherwise) go unstable (even doing loops) while I > sought > refuge under the nearest motorhome :-) I never expected to be the source > of > such a missile, though. I can be thankful that only the playa suffered > the > result of a hit under full thrust. > > The min dia project was a 114mm "O" to a 98mm "M". The sustainer > disintegrated into thousands of shards of composite pieces and > simultaneously peeled the AT motor case into aluminum strips while adding > the propellant to the debris field of fiberglass, aluminum and propellant. > The booster was partially sticking out of the playa about 3' with another > 4' > of the forward end mushroomed and curled into all sorts of little curly > pieces of Al 3" and 4" long throughout the crater. Electronics boards > were > pieces, batteries were smashed flat, etc. The impact kicked chunks of > playa > straight up into the air where they fell like little bomblets into the > debris field 100'-125' out in a semi-circle. They fell pretty much > straight > down leaving little impact circles and little playa columns sticking > straight up into the air. Looked weird. > > Historically, I've always taken a pretty conservative route in design and > launch attempts. I suspect that might be something I'll get right back to > :-) > > Kent > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted > > I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... > > FredA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From bclugston1 at comcast.net Fri Oct 9 06:08:21 2009 From: bclugston1 at comcast.net (William Clugston) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 06:08:21 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted (Kent vs LCROSS) In-Reply-To: <000901ca4843$a0e45e10$e2ad1a30$@newman@comcast.net> References: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> <000901ca4843$a0e45e10$e2ad1a30$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: Kent, I think you're the clear winner in the ejecta plume contest with LCROSS. Yours was much more spectacular ;-) I was imaging with my Celestron 9.25" and saw nothing in the monitor. Bill Clugston bclugston1 at comcast.net http://www.earthskystars.net (Rocketry and Astronomy) On Oct 8, 2009, at 11:17 AM, Kent Newman wrote: > Nice video, Mike. Obviously, not a traditional track to follow but > you did > it very well :-) > > S&H was always marginal at best even when boosting successfully at > BALLS two > years ago. It's an all aluminum booster and all composite > sustainer. We > made some motor changes this year, and, although with a bit less > stability > as a result, we decided to fly it. > > Interestingly enough, S&H was used as a test case for the Class 3 > dispersion > analysis process when aero software was being tried out last > spring. Chuck > Rogers ran it on Missile DATCOM and got right back to me with the > diagnosis > that it was unstable. I used Barrowman calcs, and, although > marginally > stable, added the fact that we had a previously successful flight to > support > trying it again. We decided to go ahead with it as a test case. > > I....was.....wrong! > > We have a year to determine the differences between the two measures > of > stability, but, obviously, Missile DATCOM and RASAero (for single > stage > projects and heavily modeled after MD) have my attention in any final > analysis. I have only to hope that Chuck can take a break from the > Aeries > escape tower and capsule project and add staged vehicles to his > software. > > Truthfully, I expected wiggle during the boost but nothing like what > actually happened! Talk about a "playa penetrator". I've seen other > rockets (staged and otherwise) go unstable (even doing loops) while > I sought > refuge under the nearest motorhome :-) I never expected to be the > source of > such a missile, though. I can be thankful that only the playa > suffered the > result of a hit under full thrust. > > The min dia project was a 114mm "O" to a 98mm "M". The sustainer > disintegrated into thousands of shards of composite pieces and > simultaneously peeled the AT motor case into aluminum strips while > adding > the propellant to the debris field of fiberglass, aluminum and > propellant. > The booster was partially sticking out of the playa about 3' with > another 4' > of the forward end mushroomed and curled into all sorts of little > curly > pieces of Al 3" and 4" long throughout the crater. Electronics > boards were > pieces, batteries were smashed flat, etc. The impact kicked chunks > of playa > straight up into the air where they fell like little bomblets into the > debris field 100'-125' out in a semi-circle. They fell pretty much > straight > down leaving little impact circles and little playa columns sticking > straight up into the air. Looked weird. > > Historically, I've always taken a pretty conservative route in > design and > launch attempts. I suspect that might be something I'll get right > back to > :-) > > Kent > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com > ] > On Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted > > I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... > > FredA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From kent.newman at comcast.net Fri Oct 9 07:39:22 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 07:39:22 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted (Kent vs LCROSS) In-Reply-To: References: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> <000901ca4843$a0e45e10$e2ad1a30$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: <000501ca48ee$4b781e20$e2685a60$@newman@comcast.net> Well, thanks, Bill. Always good to outdo a NASA mission, but, if it's a positive declaration, please don't forget my cohorts, Jim Wilkerson and Denny Smith. We aim to please :-) Kent -----Original Message----- From: William Clugston [mailto:bclugston1 at comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 6:08 AM To: Kent Newman Cc: NorthWest Rocketry Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted (Kent vs LCROSS) Kent, I think you're the clear winner in the ejecta plume contest with LCROSS. Yours was much more spectacular ;-) I was imaging with my Celestron 9.25" and saw nothing in the monitor. Bill Clugston bclugston1 at comcast.net http://www.earthskystars.net (Rocketry and Astronomy) From fred at azinger.com Fri Oct 9 08:11:05 2009 From: fred at azinger.com (Fred Azinger) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 08:11:05 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted (Kent vs LCROSS) In-Reply-To: <000501ca48ee$4b781e20$e2685a60$@newman@comcast.net> References: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> <000901ca4843$a0e45e10$e2ad1a30$@newman@comcast.net> <000501ca48ee$4b781e20$e2685a60$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: <005601ca48f2$b99bee50$2cd3caf0$@com> I fixed the video title to properly attribute the involved parties..... -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Kent Newman Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:39 AM To: 'William Clugston' Cc: 'NorthWest Rocketry' Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted (Kent vs LCROSS) Well, thanks, Bill. Always good to outdo a NASA mission, but, if it's a positive declaration, please don't forget my cohorts, Jim Wilkerson and Denny Smith. We aim to please :-) Kent -----Original Message----- From: William Clugston [mailto:bclugston1 at comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 6:08 AM To: Kent Newman Cc: NorthWest Rocketry Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted (Kent vs LCROSS) Kent, I think you're the clear winner in the ejecta plume contest with LCROSS. Yours was much more spectacular ;-) I was imaging with my Celestron 9.25" and saw nothing in the monitor. Bill Clugston bclugston1 at comcast.net http://www.earthskystars.net (Rocketry and Astronomy) _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Mfreptiles at aol.com Fri Oct 9 08:40:08 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 11:40:08 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is 72" long. At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this is a BALLS flight. Mike F. In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, lawndart.robert at gmail.com writes: Mike, It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your 54mm motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it during an EX day next year. Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters if you have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; ; Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your intent, > but that's the way it reads. > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly but am > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know before > someone else speaks for it. > > Mike F. > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From absworld at cet.com Fri Oct 9 09:00:25 2009 From: absworld at cet.com (Bob & Ann Yanecek) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 09:00:25 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <001501ca482c$702f7640$508e62c0$@newman@comcast.net> References: <570753.98419.qm@web52206.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4533C341F76E4FAC8C6013F70FC0ACE6@LaptopKrausert> <00b101ca4822$c18de3f0$44a9abd0$@com> <003d01ca4827$73dedbf0$5b9c93d0$@com> <001501ca482c$702f7640$508e62c0$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: <001401ca48f9$9f3779b0$dda66d10$@com> AV bay appears to have survived intact (again). Downloaded data reveals the following: PF Hi-Alt 45 reported 7,140'. ARTS-2 data: Max velocity = 2386 fps Max Baro altitude = 11,480' Shred occurred at 6.5 seconds. Expected motor burn was 6.6 seconds (I almost made it ;-) Motor was expected to be progressive but ARTS plot shows regressive. Motor was expected to be an M1110, ARTS reported M942. Expected peak thrust = 1293N at 4 seconds, ARTS reported 1350N at 1.1 seconds. Not sure what fps value to use for MACH but I hit 1000 fps at 2.9 seconds, 1500 fps at 4.2 sec, 2000 fps at 5.4 sec. Doesn't sound like I hung out at any velocity but instead accelerated steadily till shredding. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:32 AM To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? K -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." Bob, This was your problem..... Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as fast as possible. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this ?award?! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From kent.newman at comcast.net Fri Oct 9 09:27:53 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 09:27:53 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <001401ca48f9$9f3779b0$dda66d10$@com> References: <570753.98419.qm@web52206.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4533C341F76E4FAC8C6013F70FC0ACE6@LaptopKrausert> <00b101ca4822$c18de3f0$44a9abd0$@com> <003d01ca4827$73dedbf0$5b9c93d0$@com> <001501ca482c$702f7640$508e62c0$@newman@comcast.net> <001401ca48f9$9f3779b0$dda66d10$@com> Message-ID: <000601ca48fd$744316c0$5cc94440$@newman@comcast.net> Max Q, baby! Usually does the trick. K -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek [mailto:absworld at cet.com] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:00 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... AV bay appears to have survived intact (again). Downloaded data reveals the following: PF Hi-Alt 45 reported 7,140'. ARTS-2 data: Max velocity = 2386 fps Max Baro altitude = 11,480' Shred occurred at 6.5 seconds. Expected motor burn was 6.6 seconds (I almost made it ;-) Motor was expected to be progressive but ARTS plot shows regressive. Motor was expected to be an M1110, ARTS reported M942. Expected peak thrust = 1293N at 4 seconds, ARTS reported 1350N at 1.1 seconds. Not sure what fps value to use for MACH but I hit 1000 fps at 2.9 seconds, 1500 fps at 4.2 sec, 2000 fps at 5.4 sec. Doesn't sound like I hung out at any velocity but instead accelerated steadily till shredding. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:32 AM To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? K -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." Bob, This was your problem..... Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as fast as possible. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this ?award?! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From jhadv at pacifier.com Fri Oct 9 09:39:29 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (Paul Bogdanich) Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 09:39:29 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20091009093234.00c48d38@mail.iinet.com> Nice to get that electronics bay / flight recorder back. Without that the whole thing is an even greater loss and it's hard to learn anything. On a personal note it reassures me that my priorities ((1) successful boost, (2) get the damn drogue out preferably at apogee wherever that is, (3) in the event that (1) or (2) don't work out get the ebay back) are something close to correct. From john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com Fri Oct 9 09:41:14 2009 From: john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com (john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 09:41:14 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] NAR L2 Cert Team Needed For Rocketober! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841B62FA2FC@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> I'm going to try to make the launch and can help you out, but the control of my schedule isn't under my control. John -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 4:22 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] NAR L2 Cert Team Needed For Rocketober! I am going to be ready to take the test and attempt an L2 Cert flight for Rocketober at Brothers Oregon. I am wondering if there wil bee anyone there to give me the test and Cert my flight? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 9 10:51:23 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 10:51:23 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] NAR L2 Cert Team Needed For Rocketober! In-Reply-To: <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841B62FA2FC@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> References: <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841B62FA2FC@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> Message-ID: That would be Great John. Anyone else that can Cert an L2 flight would be more than welcome to add their names to the hat as well. The more the better as some people may not be able to make it due to last minute issues. Lest we forget Mike F.'s last attempted trip to BALLS. From what I hear I am not the only person that wishes to go for their L2 at Rocketober either. I plan on taking the written here with Steven Tarr before going, so I will just need Flight Cert witnesses. Chris Guenther On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 9:41 AM, wrote: > I'm going to try to make the launch and can help you out, but the control > of my schedule isn't under my control. > > John > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 4:22 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] NAR L2 Cert Team Needed For Rocketober! > > I am going to be ready to take the test and attempt an L2 Cert flight for > Rocketober at Brothers Oregon. I am wondering if there wil bee anyone > there > to give me the test and Cert my flight? > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 9 11:06:22 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 11:06:22 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <001401ca48f9$9f3779b0$dda66d10$@com> References: <570753.98419.qm@web52206.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4533C341F76E4FAC8C6013F70FC0ACE6@LaptopKrausert> <00b101ca4822$c18de3f0$44a9abd0$@com> <003d01ca4827$73dedbf0$5b9c93d0$@com> <001401ca48f9$9f3779b0$dda66d10$@com> Message-ID: Bob Sounds to me like you were flirting with Mach 2 at shred. Chris On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 9:00 AM, Bob & Ann Yanecek wrote: > AV bay appears to have survived intact (again). > > Downloaded data reveals the following: > PF Hi-Alt 45 reported 7,140'. > > ARTS-2 data: > Max velocity = 2386 fps > Max Baro altitude = 11,480' > Shred occurred at 6.5 seconds. > Expected motor burn was 6.6 seconds (I almost made it ;-) > Motor was expected to be progressive but ARTS plot shows regressive. > Motor was expected to be an M1110, ARTS reported M942. > Expected peak thrust = 1293N at 4 seconds, ARTS reported 1350N at 1.1 > seconds. > Not sure what fps value to use for MACH but I hit 1000 fps at 2.9 seconds, > 1500 fps at 4.2 sec, 2000 fps at 5.4 sec. > > Doesn't sound like I hung out at any velocity but instead accelerated > steadily till shredding. > > Bob Yanecek > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:32 AM > To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; > raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? > > K > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM > To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; > raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." > > Bob, > This was your problem..... > Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. > Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic > region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push > through..... can you say shred-o-matic. > > As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as > fast as possible. > > FredA > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM > To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron > Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an > aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured > out. > Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. > Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for > extra bight to the airframe. > Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig ( > http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). > Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the > fin and tapering towards the edges. > Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. > What could go wrong? > > Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once > again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. > Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back > along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. > Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. > All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. > > I felt terrible and alone. > > On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of > improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there > done that'. > > As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. > > MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. > > Bob Yanecek > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Robert Krausert > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM > To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; > steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a > tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the > pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter > said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my > sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. > > There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For > me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! > Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and > avoid > that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg > Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. > > So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds > cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust > SMACK and overall SPEED. > > Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the > topic. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sam Grado" > To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; > > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > > > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > > > Sam Grado > > TRA L2 > > > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > > > sales at pvconly.com > > http://www.pvconly.com > > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com > wrote: > > > > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at > a > > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA > limits > > on casing temperature. /Steve > > > > -----Original Message----- > >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net > >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM > >>To: Cameron Tinder > >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > >> > >> > >>No Cameron, > >> > >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. > >> > >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country > >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power > rocket > >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I > >>see it , it's NOT ." > >> > >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. > >> > >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of > >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a > >>special launch for this flight. > >> > >>Ray > >> > >>----- Original Message ----- > >>From: "Cameron Tinder" > >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net > >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific > >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>Hey Ray, > >> > >> > >> > >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If > so, > >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not > >>limited to: > >> > >> > >> > >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even > flown > >>one that has gone supersonic. ) > >> > >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. > >> > >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. > >> > >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. > >> > >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a > V2, > >>so that does not count! > >> > >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket ?almost? come in ballistic. > >> > >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. > >> > >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. > >> > >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>Your rules are: > >> > >> > >> > >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll > tell > >>you motor length we need. > >> > >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. > >> > >>3) We'll provide the motor. > >> > >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. > >> > >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue > >>for launch will be chosen. > >> > >>6) You must fly in your certification level. > >> > >> > >> > >>I would like to add a few more: > >> > >> > >> > >>1) No CATO guarantee ? We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the > bragging > >>rights that come with this ?award?! > >> > >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions ? length, weight > >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. > >> > >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. > >> > >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or > >>early summer. > >> > >>5) The ?winner? will have complete bragging rights for one year or until > >>the other can make the winner fail! > >> > >> > >> > >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a ?shred-proof? rocket, I am > >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for > >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! > Frankly, > >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your > >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort > >>of thing might be quite fun! > >> > >> > >> > >>Best regard, > >> > >> > >> > >>Cameron > >> > >> > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Rockets mailing list > >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From appusher at q.com Fri Oct 9 11:08:08 2009 From: appusher at q.com (Bill Munds) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 18:08:08 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Reminder for orders to Mansfield in Oct Message-ID: Just a reminder that you need to get your pre-orders in for Mansfield in October. We will not be bringing the inventory so pre-orders are a must. Thanks, Bill EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD Join me From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 9 11:13:07 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 11:13:07 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I love building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps my hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did when the kids were born) Chris Guenther On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, wrote: > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is 72" > long. > > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this is a > BALLS flight. > > Mike F. > > > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > lawndart.robert at gmail.com writes: > > Mike, > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your 54mm > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it during > an > EX day next year. > > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters if > you > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. > > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: ; ; > > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your > intent, > > but that's the way it reads. > > > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly but am > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know > before > > someone else speaks for it. > > > > Mike F. > > > > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: > > > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From rbraibish at yahoo.com Fri Oct 9 11:42:44 2009 From: rbraibish at yahoo.com (Robert Braibish) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 11:42:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] (Kent et.al. vs LCROSS) In-Reply-To: References: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> <000901ca4843$a0e45e10$e2ad1a30$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: <536077.76380.qm@web43510.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Hear, hear!? Having seen this tragic albeit spectacular flight first hand, I can honestly say it (along with all the other spectacular launches - successful or otherwise) was more worth the 10 hour trip to Blackrock?than getting up at 0400 and traveling the mere 30 feet to the back yard to witness the NASA deal first hand.? I was observing with a 10" newt. and did not see squat (though the seeing was not the best and my mirror had not come to temp...)? I had the DVR running on the NASA Channel and when I went inside (to thaw) and watch the recording I could not help but be disappointed..."I got up at 0400 for this!?!?"? I felt like Linus sitting in the pumpkin patch....? Not so for Blackrock.? Although the weather was not ideal and I share the sentiment that things could have gone better?(on many of?the issues previously?discussed) ?I still had a great time.? Oh, BTW? anyone from team NUMB have an idea when you are going to put that Jive brewsky bullet into the atmosphere next weekend??I thought I heard talk of it going up?at Rocketober.??I reckon it will be some time?Friday, but?I'd like to be there so knowing when would be nice.? It was nice getting to meet so many of the folks involved with this hobby at BALLS?(though not all were in the?mood for small talk or?to socializing considering the preempted flights - understandably so)?I have learned soooo much just from?following the threads I look forward to getting to know you all better. TTFN Robert Braibish ________________________________ From: William Clugston To: Kent Newman Cc: NorthWest Rocketry Sent: Fri, October 9, 2009 6:08:21 AM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted (Kent vs LCROSS) Kent, I think you're the clear winner in the ejecta plume contest with LCROSS. Yours was much more spectacular ;-) I was imaging with my Celestron 9.25" and saw nothing in the monitor. Bill Clugston bclugston1 at comcast.net http://www.earthskystars.net (Rocketry and Astronomy) On Oct 8, 2009, at 11:17 AM, Kent Newman wrote: > Nice video, Mike.? Obviously, not a traditional track to follow but you did > it very well :-) > > S&H was always marginal at best even when boosting successfully at BALLS two > years ago.? It's an all aluminum booster and all composite sustainer.? We > made some motor changes this year, and, although with a bit less stability > as a result, we decided to fly it. > > Interestingly enough, S&H was used as a test case for the Class 3 dispersion > analysis process when aero software was being tried out last spring.? Chuck > Rogers ran it on Missile DATCOM and got right back to me with the diagnosis > that it was unstable.? I used Barrowman calcs, and, although marginally > stable, added the fact that we had a previously successful flight to support > trying it again.? We decided to go ahead with it as a test case. > > I....was.....wrong! > > We have a year to determine the differences between the two measures of > stability, but, obviously, Missile DATCOM and RASAero (for single stage > projects and heavily modeled after MD) have my attention in any final > analysis.? I have only to hope that Chuck can take a break from the Aeries > escape tower and capsule project and add staged vehicles to his software. > > Truthfully, I expected wiggle during the boost but nothing like what > actually happened!? Talk about a "playa penetrator".? I've seen other > rockets (staged and otherwise) go unstable (even doing loops) while I sought > refuge under the nearest motorhome :-)? I never expected to be the source of > such a missile, though.? I can be thankful that only the playa suffered the > result of a hit under full thrust. > > The min dia project was a 114mm "O" to a 98mm "M".? The sustainer > disintegrated into thousands of shards of composite pieces and > simultaneously peeled the AT motor case into aluminum strips while adding > the propellant to the debris field of fiberglass, aluminum and propellant. > The booster was partially sticking out of the playa about 3' with another 4' > of the forward end mushroomed and curled into all sorts of little curly > pieces of Al 3" and 4" long throughout the crater.? Electronics boards were > pieces, batteries were smashed flat, etc.? The impact kicked chunks of playa > straight up into the air where they fell like little bomblets into the > debris field 100'-125' out in a semi-circle.? They fell pretty much straight > down leaving little impact circles and little playa columns sticking > straight up into the air.? Looked weird. > > Historically, I've always taken a pretty conservative route in design and > launch attempts.? I suspect that might be something I'll get right back to > :-) > > Kent > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted > > I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... > > FredA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Peter.T.Ekstrom at jci.com Fri Oct 9 11:49:38 2009 From: Peter.T.Ekstrom at jci.com (Peter.T.Ekstrom at jci.com) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 11:49:38 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] (Kent et.al. vs LCROSS) - TeamNumb Keg Launch In-Reply-To: <536077.76380.qm@web43510.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Being how we'd have to launch on Friday, we might organize our own pick-up launch so we can launch on a weekend and make it more available to the brewery and assorted friends. We'll let you know in advance. -- Peter Robert Braibish To Sent by: NorthWest Rocketry rockets-bounces at r ocketsnw.com cc Subject 10/09/2009 11:43 Re: [RocketsNW] (Kent et.al. vs AM LCROSS) Hear, hear!? Having seen this tragic albeit spectacular flight first hand, I can honestly say it (along with all the other spectacular launches - successful or otherwise) was more worth the 10 hour trip to Blackrock?than getting up at 0400 and traveling the mere 30 feet to the back yard to witness the NASA deal first hand.? I was observing with a 10" newt. and did not see squat (though the seeing was not the best and my mirror had not come to temp...)? I had the DVR running on the NASA Channel and when I went inside (to thaw) and watch the recording I could not help but be disappointed..."I got up at 0400 for this!?!?"? I felt like Linus sitting in the pumpkin patch....? Not so for Blackrock.? Although the weather was not ideal and I share the sentiment that things could have gone better?(on many of?the issues previously?discussed) ?I still had a great time. Oh, BTW? anyone from team NUMB have an idea when you are going to put that Jive brewsky bullet into the atmosphere next weekend??I thought I heard talk of it going up?at Rocketober.??I reckon it will be some time?Friday, but?I'd like to be there so knowing when would be nice. It was nice getting to meet so many of the folks involved with this hobby at BALLS?(though not all were in the?mood for small talk or?to socializing considering the preempted flights - understandably so)?I have learned soooo much just from?following the threads I look forward to getting to know you all better. TTFN Robert Braibish ________________________________ From: William Clugston To: Kent Newman Cc: NorthWest Rocketry Sent: Fri, October 9, 2009 6:08:21 AM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted (Kent vs LCROSS) Kent, I think you're the clear winner in the ejecta plume contest with LCROSS. Yours was much more spectacular ;-) I was imaging with my Celestron 9.25" and saw nothing in the monitor. Bill Clugston bclugston1 at comcast.net http://www.earthskystars.net (Rocketry and Astronomy) On Oct 8, 2009, at 11:17 AM, Kent Newman wrote: > Nice video, Mike.? Obviously, not a traditional track to follow but you did > it very well :-) > > S&H was always marginal at best even when boosting successfully at BALLS two > years ago.? It's an all aluminum booster and all composite sustainer.? We > made some motor changes this year, and, although with a bit less stability > as a result, we decided to fly it. > > Interestingly enough, S&H was used as a test case for the Class 3 dispersion > analysis process when aero software was being tried out last spring. Chuck > Rogers ran it on Missile DATCOM and got right back to me with the diagnosis > that it was unstable.? I used Barrowman calcs, and, although marginally > stable, added the fact that we had a previously successful flight to support > trying it again.? We decided to go ahead with it as a test case. > > I....was.....wrong! > > We have a year to determine the differences between the two measures of > stability, but, obviously, Missile DATCOM and RASAero (for single stage > projects and heavily modeled after MD) have my attention in any final > analysis.? I have only to hope that Chuck can take a break from the Aeries > escape tower and capsule project and add staged vehicles to his software. > > Truthfully, I expected wiggle during the boost but nothing like what > actually happened!? Talk about a "playa penetrator".? I've seen other > rockets (staged and otherwise) go unstable (even doing loops) while I sought > refuge under the nearest motorhome :-)? I never expected to be the source of > such a missile, though.? I can be thankful that only the playa suffered the > result of a hit under full thrust. > > The min dia project was a 114mm "O" to a 98mm "M".? The sustainer > disintegrated into thousands of shards of composite pieces and > simultaneously peeled the AT motor case into aluminum strips while adding > the propellant to the debris field of fiberglass, aluminum and propellant. > The booster was partially sticking out of the playa about 3' with another 4' > of the forward end mushroomed and curled into all sorts of little curly > pieces of Al 3" and 4" long throughout the crater.? Electronics boards were > pieces, batteries were smashed flat, etc.? The impact kicked chunks of playa > straight up into the air where they fell like little bomblets into the > debris field 100'-125' out in a semi-circle.? They fell pretty much straight > down leaving little impact circles and little playa columns sticking > straight up into the air.? Looked weird. > > Historically, I've always taken a pretty conservative route in design and > launch attempts.? I suspect that might be something I'll get right back to > :-) > > Kent > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted > > I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... > > FredA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From fred.azinger at intel.com Fri Oct 9 13:12:39 2009 From: fred.azinger at intel.com (Azinger, Fred) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 13:12:39 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail video posted In-Reply-To: <847548553E5445FEAB7DC32BC185CD38@LaptopKrausert> References: <003101ca4882$52046ad0$f60d4070$@com> <847548553E5445FEAB7DC32BC185CD38@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: Bob, Careful....sounds like you might confuse hands and drink bug juice instead of beer.... Sorry for the fright.....re-building the web page is on the todo list. Cheers, FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:21 PM To: Fred Azinger; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail video posted Oh Fred... Lets first say this has been a long hour week. Meetings at midnight, 6am, and one 18 hour day. Next let me mention your website. I pull up a browser and go to Azinger dot com, and click on rockets. Then all of a suddend, I heard a noise. My headphones are sitting on my workbench to the left. I figured my cell phone was ringing. My noisy ring tone. Picked it up and nothing there. Phone back in my pocket and continue thinking about the noise. Then I hear a noise coming from under the table. A strange, scary "wooooshhhh" sound. Now I'm convinced I've got a big bee under the bench. Foaming bee spray in hand, I'm ready. Then I hear it again, this time near the top of the workbench. I reach over and take care of priority. I grab my smokes and my open beer. And moved away, and ready to spray. The wooooshing sound continued. Then I began to think and reached over and put the headphone on. Nothing. About when I was ready to take them off, WOOOOSSHHHH!!!!. No skidmarks. But likely close, because I was still looking for that bee. Fred, I nearly spilled my beer. Let me say great video and website. BUT please warn us or at least me that your web site has auto-run video and audio. With bee kill foam can in hand, and beer... Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Azinger" To: Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 6:46 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail video posted > It's a large file -- 220MByte. > > Make sure you watch till almost the 4 minute mark (~3:52) ....worth the > wait > IMHO. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 9 13:54:41 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 13:54:41 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Room for 2 people for to go to Rocketober Message-ID: I live in the Portland Area and I have 2 seats that I could fill for the trip to Rocketober in my Van. I am taking my son with me and plan to stay either Friday and Saturday night or Just Saturday night. When I get there I will either have removed the third bench before hand or it the site. There will be plenty of room for gear, rockets, food, ect... There is also the roof rack that can be loaded up with gear. I will be sleeping in the van with my son and a space heater. If you have a tent that works for you bring it. Or if you plan on staying in a hotel/motel that will be fine as well. I can run from the site and back no big deal. I will only ask to split the cost of gas. From winningstad at comcast.net Fri Oct 9 14:12:53 2009 From: winningstad at comcast.net (Dennis S Winningstad) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 14:12:53 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] (Kent et.al. vs LCROSS) In-Reply-To: <536077.76380.qm@web43510.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <005101ca4832$cf886e70$6e994b50$@com> <000901ca4843$a0e45e10$e2ad1a30$@newman@comcast.net> <536077.76380.qm@web43510.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0aea01ca4925$4424f210$cc6ed630$@net> Robert, get yer anatomy out there with your 'scope EARLY!!!!!!!!!!!!! Dennis S Winningstad 503-781-3529 -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Braibish Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:43 AM To: NorthWest Rocketry Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] (Kent et.al. vs LCROSS) Hear, hear!? Having seen this tragic albeit spectacular flight first hand, I can honestly say it (along with all the other spectacular launches - successful or otherwise) was more worth the 10 hour trip to Blackrock?than getting up at 0400 and traveling the mere 30 feet to the back yard to witness the NASA deal first hand.? I was observing with a 10" newt. and did not see squat (though the seeing was not the best and my mirror had not come to temp...)? I had the DVR running on the NASA Channel and when I went inside (to thaw) and watch the recording I could not help but be disappointed..."I got up at 0400 for this!?!?"? I felt like Linus sitting in the pumpkin patch....? Not so for Blackrock.? Although the weather was not ideal and I share the sentiment that things could have gone better?(on many of?the issues previously?discussed) ?I still had a great time.? Oh, BTW? anyone from team NUMB have an idea when you are going to put that Jive brewsky bullet into the atmosphere next weekend??I thought I heard talk of it going up?at Rocketober.??I reckon it will be some time?Friday, but?I'd like to be there so knowing when would be nice.? It was nice getting to meet so many of the folks involved with this hobby at BALLS?(though not all were in the?mood for small talk or?to socializing considering the preempted flights - understandably so)?I have learned soooo much just from?following the threads I look forward to getting to know you all better. TTFN Robert Braibish ________________________________ From: William Clugston To: Kent Newman Cc: NorthWest Rocketry Sent: Fri, October 9, 2009 6:08:21 AM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Video Posted (Kent vs LCROSS) Kent, I think you're the clear winner in the ejecta plume contest with LCROSS. Yours was much more spectacular ;-) I was imaging with my Celestron 9.25" and saw nothing in the monitor. Bill Clugston bclugston1 at comcast.net http://www.earthskystars.net (Rocketry and Astronomy) On Oct 8, 2009, at 11:17 AM, Kent Newman wrote: > Nice video, Mike.? Obviously, not a traditional track to follow but you did > it very well :-) > > S&H was always marginal at best even when boosting successfully at BALLS two > years ago.? It's an all aluminum booster and all composite sustainer.? We > made some motor changes this year, and, although with a bit less stability > as a result, we decided to fly it. > > Interestingly enough, S&H was used as a test case for the Class 3 dispersion > analysis process when aero software was being tried out last spring.? Chuck > Rogers ran it on Missile DATCOM and got right back to me with the diagnosis > that it was unstable.? I used Barrowman calcs, and, although marginally > stable, added the fact that we had a previously successful flight to support > trying it again.? We decided to go ahead with it as a test case. > > I....was.....wrong! > > We have a year to determine the differences between the two measures of > stability, but, obviously, Missile DATCOM and RASAero (for single stage > projects and heavily modeled after MD) have my attention in any final > analysis.? I have only to hope that Chuck can take a break from the Aeries > escape tower and capsule project and add staged vehicles to his software. > > Truthfully, I expected wiggle during the boost but nothing like what > actually happened!? Talk about a "playa penetrator".? I've seen other > rockets (staged and otherwise) go unstable (even doing loops) while I sought > refuge under the nearest motorhome :-)? I never expected to be the source of > such a missile, though.? I can be thankful that only the playa suffered the > result of a hit under full thrust. > > The min dia project was a 114mm "O" to a 98mm "M".? The sustainer > disintegrated into thousands of shards of composite pieces and > simultaneously peeled the AT motor case into aluminum strips while adding > the propellant to the debris field of fiberglass, aluminum and propellant. > The booster was partially sticking out of the playa about 3' with another 4' > of the forward end mushroomed and curled into all sorts of little curly > pieces of Al 3" and 4" long throughout the crater.? Electronics boards were > pieces, batteries were smashed flat, etc.? The impact kicked chunks of playa > straight up into the air where they fell like little bomblets into the > debris field 100'-125' out in a semi-circle.? They fell pretty much straight > down leaving little impact circles and little playa columns sticking > straight up into the air.? Looked weird. > > Historically, I've always taken a pretty conservative route in design and > launch attempts.? I suspect that might be something I'll get right back to > :-) > > Kent > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:17 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Video Posted > > I posted a video of Kent and Co's two stage gone wild...... > > FredA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From george at rachors.com Fri Oct 9 16:44:02 2009 From: george at rachors.com (George Rachor) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:44:02 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] NAR L2 Cert Team Needed For Rocketober! In-Reply-To: <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841B62FA2FC@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> References: <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841B62FA2FC@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> Message-ID: <14DE2F6F-AA00-4CC2-A452-E778B38AB12F@rachors.com> There is a chance I'll be over there too. I'm still working to arrange it. For me it would be Saturday only. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- George L. Rachor Jr. george at rachors.com Hillsboro, OR http://rachors.com United States of America Amateur Radio : KD7DCX On Oct 9, 2009, at 9:41 AM, wrote: > I'm going to try to make the launch and can help you out, but the > control of my schedule isn't under my control. > > John > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets- > bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 4:22 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] NAR L2 Cert Team Needed For Rocketober! > > I am going to be ready to take the test and attempt an L2 Cert > flight for > Rocketober at Brothers Oregon. I am wondering if there wil bee > anyone there > to give me the test and Cert my flight? > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From raystoner99 at comcast.net Fri Oct 9 17:41:53 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (W. Raymond Stoner) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 17:41:53 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000301ca4942$77153c30$653fb490$@net> You need to be L3 to fly this motor. Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I love building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps my hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did when the kids were born) Chris Guenther On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, wrote: > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is 72" > long. > > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this is a > BALLS flight. > > Mike F. > > > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > lawndart.robert at gmail.com writes: > > Mike, > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your 54mm > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it during > an > EX day next year. > > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters if > you > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. > > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: ; ; > > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your > intent, > > but that's the way it reads. > > > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly but am > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know > before > > someone else speaks for it. > > > > Mike F. > > > > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: > > > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From raystoner99 at comcast.net Fri Oct 9 17:48:19 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (W. Raymond Stoner) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 17:48:19 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED In-Reply-To: <004b01ca489c$93345960$b99d0c20$@com> References: <28787.76.115.45.22.1255058793.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> <004b01ca489c$93345960$b99d0c20$@com> Message-ID: <000401ca4943$5cf27330$16d75990$@net> I've always wondered why this is so... >From a programming standpoint, wouldn't it be easy to detect +1g or -1G upon power up and adjust based on that condition? At that point a "this end up" requirement no longer matters. I must not be seeing something that's obvious to the programmer...AFAIK all altimeters that use accelerometers work this way. Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:54 PM To: jhadv at pacifier.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED UPSIDE-DOWN Altimeter..... Satisfied ACC<0; VEL<0 and ALT References: <000301ca4942$77153c30$653fb490$@net> Message-ID: <0b5a01ca4943$94f06760$bed13620$@net> Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? Then what's the problem????????????? Dennis S Winningstad 503-781-3529 -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM To: 'Christopher Guenther'; Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust You need to be L3 to fly this motor. Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I love building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps my hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did when the kids were born) Chris Guenther On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, wrote: > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is 72" > long. > > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this is a > BALLS flight. > > Mike F. > > > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > lawndart.robert at gmail.com writes: > > Mike, > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your 54mm > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it during > an > EX day next year. > > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters if > you > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. > > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: ; ; > > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your > intent, > > but that's the way it reads. > > > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly but am > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know > before > > someone else speaks for it. > > > > Mike F. > > > > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: > > > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From raystoner99 at comcast.net Fri Oct 9 17:52:54 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (W. Raymond Stoner) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 17:52:54 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <0b5a01ca4943$94f06760$bed13620$@net> References: <000301ca4942$77153c30$653fb490$@net> <0b5a01ca4943$94f06760$bed13620$@net> Message-ID: <000501ca4944$017ea040$047be0c0$@net> Dennis, you KNOW I am, you (and Jim Wilkerson) signed my paperwork! You want me to put my name on the flight card? Ray -----Original Message----- From: Dennis S Winningstad [mailto:winningstad at comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:50 PM To: 'W. Raymond Stoner'; 'Christopher Guenther'; Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? Then what's the problem????????????? Dennis S Winningstad 503-781-3529 -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM To: 'Christopher Guenther'; Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust You need to be L3 to fly this motor. Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I love building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps my hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did when the kids were born) Chris Guenther On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, wrote: > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is 72" > long. > > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this is a > BALLS flight. > > Mike F. > > > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > lawndart.robert at gmail.com writes: > > Mike, > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your 54mm > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it during > an > EX day next year. > > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters if > you > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. > > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: ; ; > > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your > intent, > > but that's the way it reads. > > > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly but am > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know > before > > someone else speaks for it. > > > > Mike F. > > > > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: > > > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Fri Oct 9 17:57:14 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 17:57:14 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust References: Message-ID: <277A4C6E815A45A7A8CFC72AA2B84370@LaptopKrausert> Mike, Could be my excuse to purchase a lathe and milling machine. Something clearly required for my shop. Why? Just cause. ;-) If I cannot make Balls 2010, I could always give you the rocket to fly. I'll wait to see if you get other takers. But I'm planning BALLS 2010 attendance. Maybe Ray wants the motor. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com To: lawndart.robert at gmail.com ; sutchek at sbcglobal.net ; steve-c at ix.netcom.com ; Rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 8:40 AM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is 72" long. At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this is a BALLS flight. Mike F. In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, lawndart.robert at gmail.com writes: Mike, It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your 54mm motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it during an EX day next year. Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters if you have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; ; Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your intent, > but that's the way it reads. > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly but am > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know before > someone else speaks for it. > > Mike F. > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From raystoner99 at comcast.net Fri Oct 9 18:05:44 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (W. Raymond Stoner) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 18:05:44 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <63352.61251.qm@web82008.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <63352.61251.qm@web82008.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001201ca4945$cbab1b40$630151c0$@net> Just to clarify, Paul, who's motor are you accepting? Mine or Mike's? He requires a 54mm motor mount, preferably a min diameter design. If you want one of mine, 54mm or 75mm would work best for me. Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of The Sutchek's Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 12:01 AM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust AND SO? , after reading and re reading a few of the more interesting emails... I accept. ? but on a more serious note : the airframes and their inherent problems were ACTUALLY a side note to my main point of the people that were putting on BALLS allowing rockets to fly in unsafe conditons....and of the people that?" JUST HAD TO FLY " when conditions were not safe...?From what I know , there?was ?more than one Trippoli board member that?was ?at ?BALLS and they and the LCO allowed rockets to fly in conditions that are restricted by Trippoli rules ? cut and paste this: Weather The RSO must have clear and convincing evidence that the following constraints are not violated. 1. Do not launch if ground level winds exceed 20 mph. 2. Do not launch if the planned flight path will carry the vehicle through any clouds ? BUT any HOO ,,,, In a year we'll see whats up ! or not :) ? keep in touch !? - Paul _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From raystoner99 at comcast.net Fri Oct 9 18:10:37 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (W. Raymond Stoner) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 18:10:37 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <277A4C6E815A45A7A8CFC72AA2B84370@LaptopKrausert> References: <277A4C6E815A45A7A8CFC72AA2B84370@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: <001301ca4946$7aa60740$6ff215c0$@net> I don't want the motor. Min Diameter is not my style...so I don't have enough experience in it yet. Give me a couple years, and a load of successful flights on some of my more aggressive motors and I'll give it a whirl. I demonstrated this year at BALLS that I can't even stand up to the K500 I flew in a 54mm airframe. Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:57 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; sutchek at sbcglobal.net; steve-c at ix.netcom.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Mike, Could be my excuse to purchase a lathe and milling machine. Something clearly required for my shop. Why? Just cause. ;-) If I cannot make Balls 2010, I could always give you the rocket to fly. I'll wait to see if you get other takers. But I'm planning BALLS 2010 attendance. Maybe Ray wants the motor. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com To: lawndart.robert at gmail.com ; sutchek at sbcglobal.net ; steve-c at ix.netcom.com ; Rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 8:40 AM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is 72" long. At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this is a BALLS flight. Mike F. In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, lawndart.robert at gmail.com writes: Mike, It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your 54mm motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it during an EX day next year. Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters if you have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; ; Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your intent, > but that's the way it reads. > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly but am > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know before > someone else speaks for it. > > Mike F. > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From jhadv at pacifier.com Fri Oct 9 18:26:34 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (jhadv at pacifier.com) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 18:26:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50657.209.253.79.135.1255137994.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> Fred; Sorry about HardTail. Hey I was wondering though, your rocket had the premature eject because of the altimeter issue. Concerning the rocket that went unstable and burned in under power, does anyone have an explanation for that other than it was unstable as constructed? From sb at berfield.com Fri Oct 9 18:35:06 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 18:35:06 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED Message-ID: <200910100135.n9A1Z6e2005555@omr17.networksolutionsemail.com> I think the high g units Mr Fisher uses (can't recall the name) do that. -----Original Message----- From: W. Raymond Stoner Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:48 PM To: 'Fred Azinger' ; jhadv at pacifier.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED I've always wondered why this is so... >From a programming standpoint, wouldn't it be easy to detect +1g or -1G upon power up and adjust based on that condition? At that point a "this end up" requirement no longer matters. I must not be seeing something that's obvious to the programmer...AFAIK all altimeters that use accelerometers work this way. Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:54 PM To: jhadv at pacifier.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED UPSIDE-DOWN Altimeter..... Satisfied ACC<0; VEL<0 and ALT I'd volunteer to build it, but even my self delusions have limits. -----Original Message----- From: Robert Krausert Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:57 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; sutchek at sbcglobal.net; steve-c at ix.netcom.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Mike, Could be my excuse to purchase a lathe and milling machine. Something clearly required for my shop. Why? Just cause. ;-) If I cannot make Balls 2010, I could always give you the rocket to fly. I'll wait to see if you get other takers. But I'm planning BALLS 2010 attendance. Maybe Ray wants the motor. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com To: lawndart.robert at gmail.com ; sutchek at sbcglobal.net ; steve-c at ix.netcomcom ; Rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 8:40 AM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is 72" long. At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this is a BALLS flight. Mike F. In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, lawndart.robert at gmail.com writes: Mike, It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your 54mm motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it during an EX day next year. Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters if you have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; ; Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your intent, > but that's the way it reads. > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly but am > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know before > someone else speaks for it. > > Mike F. > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From kent.newman at comcast.net Fri Oct 9 19:06:56 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 19:06:56 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted In-Reply-To: <50657.209.253.79.135.1255137994.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> References: <50657.209.253.79.135.1255137994.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> Message-ID: <001401ca494e$587fd5d0$097f8170$@newman@comcast.net> A rocket rotates about its center of gravity. The center of pressure is where lift and drag act upon the rocket. If the center of pressure is too close or above the center of gravity to provide a restoring force, lift and drag still act upon the airframe but the torque is reversed and the rocket becomes unstable. Now, any force on the forward part of the rocket is accentuated in that direction (wind, drag, etc.) without the restoring force. A rocket generally is stable when the center of pressure (CP) is at least a body caliber below the center of gravity (CG); sometimes less, sometimes more. In the case of S&H, we tried "sometimes less" and it didn't work. Or something close to that explanation :-) Kent -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of jhadv at pacifier.com Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 6:27 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted Fred; Sorry about HardTail. Hey I was wondering though, your rocket had the premature eject because of the altimeter issue. Concerning the rocket that went unstable and burned in under power, does anyone have an explanation for that other than it was unstable as constructed? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 9 19:36:14 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 19:36:14 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <0b5a01ca4943$94f06760$bed13620$@net> References: <000301ca4942$77153c30$653fb490$@net> <0b5a01ca4943$94f06760$bed13620$@net> Message-ID: I know I would have to be L3. I would use it to attempt a cert for L3. Since I built everything but the motor it would qualify would it not? I plan to be L2 somewhere mid Rocketober. If not then deffinently before next BALLS. That would be a great time to Cert L3. Chris Guenther On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Dennis S Winningstad < winningstad at comcast.net> wrote: > Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? Then what's the problem????????????? > > Dennis S Winningstad > 503-781-3529 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM > To: 'Christopher Guenther'; Mfreptiles at aol.com > Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > You need to be L3 to fly this motor. > > Ray > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM > To: Mfreptiles at aol.com > Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I love > building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps my > hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did when > the kids were born) > > Chris Guenther > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, wrote: > > > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is > 72" > > long. > > > > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good > > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this is > a > > BALLS flight. > > > > Mike F. > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > lawndart.robert at gmail.com writes: > > > > Mike, > > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your 54mm > > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it during > > an > > EX day next year. > > > > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters if > > you > > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. > > > > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. > > > > Cheers, > > Robert > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: ; ; > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > > > > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your > > intent, > > > but that's the way it reads. > > > > > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly but > am > > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know > > before > > > someone else speaks for it. > > > > > > Mike F. > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > > sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: > > > > > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Rockets mailing list > > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Fri Oct 9 19:50:54 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 19:50:54 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust References: <000301ca4942$77153c30$653fb490$@net><0b5a01ca4943$94f06760$bed13620$@net> Message-ID: Chris, You want to get your L3 cert on a 54mm 72 inch motor that will exceed 100+ g's and push mach 3 for several seconds? For me, I'd ask for a L3 sponsor so I could fly. But I'd never use that for my L3. This motor will out perform most military spec missiles. I'd keep away from it except for fun. As a cert flight, scary. Save the L3 cert flight for something you have control over. Mike's motor is more of a "just try to survive." Think of trying to build a uniform to survive an impact from a logging truck approaching for a direct hit at 120 mph. I know I'd become a red splatter on the road. Your rocket needs to go from zero to "oh my god!!" in about 0.3 seconds. You might want to reconsider. That is all up to you. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Guenther" To: "Dennis S Winningstad" Cc: Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:36 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >I know I would have to be L3. I would use it to attempt a cert for L3. > Since I built everything but the motor it would qualify would it not? I > plan to be L2 somewhere mid Rocketober. If not then deffinently before > next > BALLS. That would be a great time to Cert L3. > > Chris Guenther > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Dennis S Winningstad < > winningstad at comcast.net> wrote: > >> Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? Then what's the problem????????????? >> >> Dennis S Winningstad >> 503-781-3529 >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com >> [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >> On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM >> To: 'Christopher Guenther'; Mfreptiles at aol.com >> Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >> >> You need to be L3 to fly this motor. >> >> Ray >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com >> [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >> On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM >> To: Mfreptiles at aol.com >> Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >> >> You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I love >> building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps my >> hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did when >> the kids were born) >> >> Chris Guenther >> >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, wrote: >> >> > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is >> 72" >> > long. >> > >> > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good >> > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this >> > is >> a >> > BALLS flight. >> > >> > Mike F. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >> > lawndart.robert at gmail.com writes: >> > >> > Mike, >> > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your >> > 54mm >> > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it >> > during >> > an >> > EX day next year. >> > >> > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters >> > if >> > you >> > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. >> > >> > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Robert >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: >> > To: ; ; >> > >> > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM >> > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >> > >> > >> > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your >> > intent, >> > > but that's the way it reads. >> > > >> > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly >> > > but >> am >> > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know >> > before >> > > someone else speaks for it. >> > > >> > > Mike F. >> > > >> > > >> > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >> > > sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: >> > > >> > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Rockets mailing list >> > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Rockets mailing list >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 9 19:59:28 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 19:59:28 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: <000301ca4942$77153c30$653fb490$@net> <0b5a01ca4943$94f06760$bed13620$@net> Message-ID: Mike The inner diameter has to be 54mm. Is there a rule on outer diameter? Ray For your motor I see it would be 54mm and the airframe would have to be 54mm or 75mm. Is that right or is it one of 2 motors a 54mm or a 75mm? Chris Guenther On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:50 PM, Robert Krausert wrote: > Chris, > You want to get your L3 cert on a 54mm 72 inch motor that will exceed 100+ > g's and push mach 3 for several seconds? For me, I'd ask for a L3 sponsor so > I could fly. But I'd never use that for my L3. This motor will out perform > most military spec missiles. I'd keep away from it except for fun. As a cert > flight, scary. Save the L3 cert flight for something you have control over. > Mike's motor is more of a "just try to survive." > > Think of trying to build a uniform to survive an impact from a logging > truck approaching for a direct hit at 120 mph. I know I'd become a red > splatter on the road. Your rocket needs to go from zero to "oh my god!!" in > about 0.3 seconds. > > You might want to reconsider. That is all up to you. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Guenther" < > guentherchristopher at gmail.com> > To: "Dennis S Winningstad" > Cc: > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:36 PM > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > I know I would have to be L3. I would use it to attempt a cert for L3. >> Since I built everything but the motor it would qualify would it not? I >> plan to be L2 somewhere mid Rocketober. If not then deffinently before >> next >> BALLS. That would be a great time to Cert L3. >> >> Chris Guenther >> >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Dennis S Winningstad < >> winningstad at comcast.net> wrote: >> >> Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? Then what's the problem????????????? >>> >>> Dennis S Winningstad >>> 503-781-3529 >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: >>> rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >>> On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner >>> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM >>> To: 'Christopher Guenther'; Mfreptiles at aol.com >>> Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >>> >>> You need to be L3 to fly this motor. >>> >>> Ray >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: >>> rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >>> On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther >>> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM >>> To: Mfreptiles at aol.com >>> Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >>> >>> You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I love >>> building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps my >>> hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did when >>> the kids were born) >>> >>> Chris Guenther >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, wrote: >>> >>> > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is >>> 72" >>> > long. >>> > >>> > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good >>> > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this > >>> is >>> a >>> > BALLS flight. >>> > >>> > Mike F. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >>> > lawndart.robert at gmail.com writes: >>> > >>> > Mike, >>> > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your > >>> 54mm >>> > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it > >>> during >>> > an >>> > EX day next year. >>> > >>> > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters >>> > if >>> > you >>> > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. >>> > >>> > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. >>> > >>> > Cheers, >>> > Robert >>> > ----- Original Message ----- >>> > From: >>> > To: ; ; >>> > >>> > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM >>> > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >>> > >>> > >>> > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your >>> > intent, >>> > > but that's the way it reads. >>> > > >>> > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly > > >>> but >>> am >>> > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know >>> > before >>> > > someone else speaks for it. >>> > > >>> > > Mike F. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >>> > > sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: >>> > > >>> > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE >>> > > >>> > > _______________________________________________ >>> > > Rockets mailing list >>> > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Rockets mailing list >>> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > From raystoner99 at comcast.net Fri Oct 9 20:02:38 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (W. Raymond Stoner) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 20:02:38 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: <000301ca4942$77153c30$653fb490$@net><0b5a01ca4943$94f06760$bed13620$@net> Message-ID: <002001ca4956$20cea870$626bf950$@net> You can't cert on a research motor. Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:51 PM To: Christopher Guenther; Dennis S Winningstad Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Chris, You want to get your L3 cert on a 54mm 72 inch motor that will exceed 100+ g's and push mach 3 for several seconds? For me, I'd ask for a L3 sponsor so I could fly. But I'd never use that for my L3. This motor will out perform most military spec missiles. I'd keep away from it except for fun. As a cert flight, scary. Save the L3 cert flight for something you have control over. Mike's motor is more of a "just try to survive." Think of trying to build a uniform to survive an impact from a logging truck approaching for a direct hit at 120 mph. I know I'd become a red splatter on the road. Your rocket needs to go from zero to "oh my god!!" in about 0.3 seconds. You might want to reconsider. That is all up to you. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Guenther" To: "Dennis S Winningstad" Cc: Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:36 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >I know I would have to be L3. I would use it to attempt a cert for L3. > Since I built everything but the motor it would qualify would it not? I > plan to be L2 somewhere mid Rocketober. If not then deffinently before > next > BALLS. That would be a great time to Cert L3. > > Chris Guenther > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Dennis S Winningstad < > winningstad at comcast.net> wrote: > >> Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? Then what's the problem????????????? >> >> Dennis S Winningstad >> 503-781-3529 >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com >> [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >> On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM >> To: 'Christopher Guenther'; Mfreptiles at aol.com >> Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >> >> You need to be L3 to fly this motor. >> >> Ray >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com >> [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >> On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM >> To: Mfreptiles at aol.com >> Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >> >> You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I love >> building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps my >> hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did when >> the kids were born) >> >> Chris Guenther >> >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, wrote: >> >> > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is >> 72" >> > long. >> > >> > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good >> > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this >> > is >> a >> > BALLS flight. >> > >> > Mike F. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >> > lawndart.robert at gmail.com writes: >> > >> > Mike, >> > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your >> > 54mm >> > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it >> > during >> > an >> > EX day next year. >> > >> > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters >> > if >> > you >> > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. >> > >> > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Robert >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: >> > To: ; ; >> > >> > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM >> > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >> > >> > >> > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your >> > intent, >> > > but that's the way it reads. >> > > >> > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly >> > > but >> am >> > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know >> > before >> > > someone else speaks for it. >> > > >> > > Mike F. >> > > >> > > >> > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >> > > sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: >> > > >> > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Rockets mailing list >> > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Rockets mailing list >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 9 20:06:04 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 20:06:04 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <002001ca4956$20cea870$626bf950$@net> References: <000301ca4942$77153c30$653fb490$@net> <0b5a01ca4943$94f06760$bed13620$@net> <002001ca4956$20cea870$626bf950$@net> Message-ID: That is why I build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F.'s or Ray's motor. On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM, W. Raymond Stoner wrote: > You can't cert on a research motor. > Ray > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Robert Krausert > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:51 PM > To: Christopher Guenther; Dennis S Winningstad > Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > Chris, > You want to get your L3 cert on a 54mm 72 inch motor that will exceed 100+ > g's and push mach 3 for several seconds? For me, I'd ask for a L3 sponsor > so > > I could fly. But I'd never use that for my L3. This motor will out perform > most military spec missiles. I'd keep away from it except for fun. As a > cert > > flight, scary. Save the L3 cert flight for something you have control over. > Mike's motor is more of a "just try to survive." > > Think of trying to build a uniform to survive an impact from a logging > truck > > approaching for a direct hit at 120 mph. I know I'd become a red splatter > on > > the road. Your rocket needs to go from zero to "oh my god!!" in about 0.3 > seconds. > > You might want to reconsider. That is all up to you. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christopher Guenther" > To: "Dennis S Winningstad" > Cc: > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:36 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > >I know I would have to be L3. I would use it to attempt a cert for L3. > > Since I built everything but the motor it would qualify would it not? I > > plan to be L2 somewhere mid Rocketober. If not then deffinently before > > next > > BALLS. That would be a great time to Cert L3. > > > > Chris Guenther > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Dennis S Winningstad < > > winningstad at comcast.net> wrote: > > > >> Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? Then what's the problem????????????? > >> > >> Dennis S Winningstad > >> 503-781-3529 > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com > >> [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > >> On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM > >> To: 'Christopher Guenther'; Mfreptiles at aol.com > >> Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > >> > >> You need to be L3 to fly this motor. > >> > >> Ray > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com > >> [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > >> On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM > >> To: Mfreptiles at aol.com > >> Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > >> > >> You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I love > >> building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps my > >> hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did > when > >> the kids were born) > >> > >> Chris Guenther > >> > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, wrote: > >> > >> > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is > >> 72" > >> > long. > >> > > >> > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good > >> > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this > >> > is > >> a > >> > BALLS flight. > >> > > >> > Mike F. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > >> > lawndart.robert at gmail.com writes: > >> > > >> > Mike, > >> > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your > >> > 54mm > >> > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it > >> > during > >> > an > >> > EX day next year. > >> > > >> > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters > >> > if > >> > you > >> > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. > >> > > >> > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. > >> > > >> > Cheers, > >> > Robert > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> > From: > >> > To: ; ; > >> > > >> > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM > >> > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > >> > > >> > > >> > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your > >> > intent, > >> > > but that's the way it reads. > >> > > > >> > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly > >> > > but > >> am > >> > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know > >> > before > >> > > someone else speaks for it. > >> > > > >> > > Mike F. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > >> > > sutchek at sbcglobal.net writes: > >> > > > >> > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > >> > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > Rockets mailing list > >> > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Rockets mailing list > >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Fri Oct 9 20:07:34 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 20:07:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED In-Reply-To: <000401ca4943$5cf27330$16d75990$@net> References: <28787.76.115.45.22.1255058793.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> <004b01ca489c$93345960$b99d0c20$@com> <000401ca4943$5cf27330$16d75990$@net> Message-ID: <38f6249a3eb0d48b165f04018e3092dd.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Dunno about the electronics on the market. But I can think of two possible reasons right off: 1) The accelerometer chip is designed as unidirectional, or 2) Memory space is limited in the chips used. Yes, the kind of microcontroller chips used to build these things still do have relatively limited memory even in this age of many-gigabyte thumb drives. Often the available memory is jam-crammed full with other features deemed more necessary or desirable. Remember, just a few years back NASA crashed a space probe in the Utah mud because the accelerometer had been mounted upside down. Personally, where possible I like to make things idiot proof(read: ME proof). +McG+ > I've always wondered why this is so... > >>From a programming standpoint, wouldn't it be easy to detect +1g or -1G >> upon > power up and adjust based on that condition? At that point a "this end > up" > requirement no longer matters. > > I must not be seeing something that's obvious to the programmer...AFAIK > all > altimeters that use accelerometers work this way. > > Ray > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:54 PM > To: jhadv at pacifier.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED > > UPSIDE-DOWN Altimeter..... > Satisfied ACC<0; VEL<0 and ALT acceleration..... > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of jhadv at pacifier.com > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:27 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED > > All; > I just had a chance to watch the video Fred posted. Great video. > However, is there any sophisticated reason for a rocket behaving like > that? The only one I can think of is it was unstable at the tower > before launch. If it was unstable at the tower then that's a bit of a > problem isn't is? > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From fred at azinger.com Fri Oct 9 20:08:12 2009 From: fred at azinger.com (Fred Azinger) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 20:08:12 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED In-Reply-To: <000401ca4943$5cf27330$16d75990$@net> References: <28787.76.115.45.22.1255058793.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> <004b01ca489c$93345960$b99d0c20$@com> <000401ca4943$5cf27330$16d75990$@net> Message-ID: <006201ca4956$e7462730$b5d27590$@com> One would think it would be a simple check....and easy fix if you see -1G on the pad instead of +1G...... Too darn simple to be an excusable omission IMHO. Then again -- I know only a few altimeters are "smart" enough to do this right..... With all the team watching and double checking the programming and wiring, it is hard to believe we missed the upside-down part....it was different from the 3 other altimeters we were programming at the same time.... Murphy is a rat bastard.... -----Original Message----- From: W. Raymond Stoner [mailto:raystoner99 at comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:48 PM To: 'Fred Azinger'; jhadv at pacifier.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED I've always wondered why this is so... >From a programming standpoint, wouldn't it be easy to detect +1g or -1G upon power up and adjust based on that condition? At that point a "this end up" requirement no longer matters. I must not be seeing something that's obvious to the programmer...AFAIK all altimeters that use accelerometers work this way. Ray -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:54 PM To: jhadv at pacifier.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED UPSIDE-DOWN Altimeter..... Satisfied ACC<0; VEL<0 and ALT No, but it should not contain centering rings, nor be 100 layers of carbon cloth either. I think somewhere between .0625" and .095" wall in carbon might do the trick, providing you use the right lay-up technique, probably some uni-directional, and some sleeving in alternating layers, combined with high temp epoxy and proper post curing. The airframe and nosecone should weigh around 3 lbs. or less. The 38mm version with aluminum airframe comes in at under 2 lbs. For the record, Paul has contacted me off list to accept the challenge. The above hints should get him started. Also, no coupler. It will break at the coupler joint. The upper section should sleeve over the motor, using the motor as the coupler. I'm giving away a few secrets here, but he'll need all the help he can get. I wish him the best of luck. If it survives, I do not think he will say it was no big deal. It is one heck of an engineering challenge, one that I could not meet until I got away from composites. I may try again in the future someday, when I forget what it's like to shred expensive electronics. If anyone else want to fly this motor in the future, I may offer the same deal, but I would hope that you witness a flight before accepting, because you might change your mind. Keeping the fins on is difficult, but not folding the upper airframe section in half is harder. It will probably render your rocket single use even if it survives due to ablation. The 54mm version of this motor will have even higher performance than the 38mm L due to the lower mass fraction and higher thrust. I shudder. Mike F. In a message dated 10/9/2009 8:00:32 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, guentherchristopher at gmail.com writes: Mike The inner diameter has to be 54mm. Is there a rule on outer diameter? Ray From jhornsby3 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 9 21:08:59 2009 From: jhornsby3 at yahoo.com (John Hornsby) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 21:08:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <83297.29170.qm@web110217.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> And you don't want to use them for staging. They lite with the kick of a pissed off, drunk mule. Know it for a fact. Seen it, and had to rebuild because of it. Still find it hard to believe, after the few years. John Hornsby ________________________________ From: "Mfreptiles at aol..com" To: guentherchristopher at gmail.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Friday, October 9, 2009 8:56:18 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust No, but it should not contain centering rings, nor be 100 layers of carbon? cloth either.? I think somewhere between .0625" and .095" wall in carbon? might do the trick, providing you use the right lay-up technique, probably some? uni-directional, and some sleeving in alternating layers, combined with high? temp epoxy and proper post curing.? The airframe and nosecone should weigh? around 3 lbs. or less.? The 38mm version with aluminum airframe comes in at? under 2 lbs. For the record, Paul has contacted me off list to accept the? challenge. The above hints should get him started.? Also, no coupler.? It? will break at the coupler joint.? The upper section should sleeve over the? motor, using the motor as the coupler. I'm giving away a few secrets here, but he'll need all the help he can? get.? I wish him the best of luck.? If it survives, I do not think he? will say it was no big deal.? It is one heck of an engineering challenge,? one that I could not meet until I got away from composites.? I may try? again in the future someday, when I forget what it's like to shred expensive? electronics. If anyone else want to fly this motor in the future, I may offer the same? deal, but I would hope that you witness a flight before accepting, because you? might change your mind.? Keeping the fins on is difficult, but not folding? the upper airframe section in half is harder.? It will probably render your? rocket single use even if it survives due to ablation. The 54mm version of this motor will have even higher performance than the? 38mm L due to the lower mass fraction and higher thrust.? I shudder. Mike F. In a message dated 10/9/2009 8:00:32 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,? guentherchristopher at gmail.com writes: Mike The inner diameter has to be 54mm.? Is there a rule on? outer diameter? Ray _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Mfreptiles at aol.com Fri Oct 9 21:10:13 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 00:10:13 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED Message-ID: The parrot does not care which end is up. Nice little units, with three event outputs. Onboard USB charged battery for powering the FC so you don't need to hook up the 9V for programming. A couple things I don't like but probably trade-offs for being so small. I also like Dehate's PICO A1 for simpler stuff, and the price is good. That one does care which way the arrow points. Mike F. In a message dated 10/9/2009 6:35:50 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, sb at berfield.com writes: I think the high g units Mr Fisher uses (can't recall the name) do that. From Mfreptiles at aol.com Fri Oct 9 21:13:15 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 00:13:15 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted Message-ID: Too much metal in the propellant. :) I did that once. Flew fine on no metals load, then loaded up a high zinc and didn't check CP/CG. Loopy. Mike F. In a message dated 10/9/2009 7:07:26 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, kent.newman at comcast.net writes: Or something close to that explanation :-) From Mfreptiles at aol.com Fri Oct 9 21:19:46 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 00:19:46 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: John, that was just a baby J. :) Little itty bitty six grain 38mm. Mike F. In a message dated 10/9/2009 9:09:46 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jhornsby3 at yahoo.com writes: And you don't want to use them for staging. They lite with the kick of a pissed off, drunk mule. Know it for a fact. Seen it, and had to rebuild because of it. Still find it hard to believe, after the few years. John Hornsby From jhornsby3 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 9 21:51:27 2009 From: jhornsby3 at yahoo.com (John Hornsby) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 21:51:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <939847.50852.qm@web110217.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> And kicked so hard, people on the other end of the flightline were wandering what the heck it was. Just my point. Bigger motor bigger kick. :o) John ________________________________ From: "Mfreptiles at aol.com" To: jhornsby3 at yahoo.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Fri, October 9, 2009 9:19:46 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust John,?that was just a baby J. :)? Little itty bitty six grain 38mm. Mike F. In a message dated 10/9/2009 9:09:46 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jhornsby3 at yahoo.com writes: And you don't want to use them for staging. They lite with the kick of a pissed off, drunk mule. Know it for a fact. Seen it, and had to rebuild because of it. Still find it hard to believe, after the few years. > >John Hornsby > > From sealtee at cableone.net Fri Oct 9 21:52:07 2009 From: sealtee at cableone.net (Cameron Tinder) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 21:52:07 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: <001801ca4965$6bc07520$43415f60$@net> Hey Chris, I think that I can speak for many when I say that I appreciate your enthusiasm. I might though make a suggestion. Build a tough 54mm min diameter rocket and once you are L2, get a hold of a J1999. Relative to this un-gawdly 72 inch M-class motor it is quite tame, that is not to say that this little motor will not enlighten you and entertain everyone else at the same time. If you can build a min diameter rocket that can survive this motor you might think again about this 54mm M motor but keep in mind, that M motor has more than 5 times the thrust! (That would be around 2500 pounds of thrust for a half second!) Here is a link to this motor thrust specs: http://www.thrustcurve.org/simfilesearch.jsp?id=959 All this discussion on this sort of rapid ride rocket has gotten me thinking and I will likely build such a project. If I were to build a 54mm I will first try flying it on something like a J1999, just to see if I can build a minimum diameter light weight rocket that can take this kind if exploding thrust. Again, this is a relatively small motor using only a 1280 case, nothing compared to some of the motors that are being discussed here! Once again Chris, I do appreciate your enthusiasm, don't ever let reality dampen it, but do allow it to be tempered! Fly safe my friend and good luck with your L2 cert flight next weekend! Cameron (Still flying at the speed of thought!) From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Fri Oct 9 21:53:32 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 21:53:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED In-Reply-To: <006201ca4956$e7462730$b5d27590$@com> References: <28787.76.115.45.22.1255058793.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> <004b01ca489c$93345960$b99d0c20$@com> <000401ca4943$5cf27330$16d75990$@net> <006201ca4956$e7462730$b5d27590$@com> Message-ID: <8192213681a249b1bdb88ff3ce1c8cfc.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> IIRC chips like the PIC are a favorite for altimeters. Memory space reminiscent of my trusty old Timex/Sinclair. If it takes 20 bytes to do the check and you've already hacked the code down to fit with only three bytes free...ah, fond memories of programming my TI-59, or the old Rat Shack EC-4026 I still drag around to launches with the Fehskins-Malewicki equations stored in its roughly 1k bytes of non-volatile memory. I used that one at work for a while, and after some serious hacking had everything I needed in it with ZERO bytes free. :) So I kinda know where the altimeter designers are coming from. But I agree totally. A little less data logging, a lot more foolproof would be good! +McG+ > One would think it would be a simple check....and easy fix if you see -1G > on > the pad instead of +1G...... > Too darn simple to be an excusable omission IMHO. > > Then again -- I know only a few altimeters are "smart" enough to do this > right..... > With all the team watching and double checking the programming and wiring, > it is hard to believe we missed the upside-down part....it was different > from the 3 other altimeters we were programming at the same time.... > > Murphy is a rat bastard.... > > > -----Original Message----- > From: W. Raymond Stoner [mailto:raystoner99 at comcast.net] > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:48 PM > To: 'Fred Azinger'; jhadv at pacifier.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED > > I've always wondered why this is so... > >>From a programming standpoint, wouldn't it be easy to detect +1g or -1G >> upon > power up and adjust based on that condition? At that point a "this end > up" > requirement no longer matters. > > I must not be seeing something that's obvious to the programmer...AFAIK > all > altimeters that use accelerometers work this way. > > Ray > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:54 PM > To: jhadv at pacifier.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED > > UPSIDE-DOWN Altimeter..... > Satisfied ACC<0; VEL<0 and ALT acceleration..... > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of jhadv at pacifier.com > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:27 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED > > All; > I just had a chance to watch the video Fred posted. Great video. > However, is there any sophisticated reason for a rocket behaving like > that? The only one I can think of is it was unstable at the tower > before launch. If it was unstable at the tower then that's a bit of a > problem isn't is? > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From sb at berfield.com Fri Oct 9 22:16:43 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 05:16:43 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: I was wondering about the coupler thing - I coun't come up with anything beyond simply kicking the whole motor out in lieue of traditional separation. You are truly a psycho - and i mean that as a high compliment. -----Original Message----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Friday, October 9, 2009 08:56 PM To: guentherchristopher at gmail.com, lawndart.robert at gmail.com Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust No, but it should not contain centering rings, nor be 100 layers of carbon cloth either. I think somewhere between .0625" and .095" wall in carbon might do the trick, providing you use the right lay-up technique, probably some uni-directional, and some sleeving in alternating layers, combined with high temp epoxy and proper post curing. The airframe and nosecone should weigh around 3 lbs. or less. The 38mm version with aluminum airframe comes in at under 2 lbs. For the record, Paul has contacted me off list to accept the challenge. The above hints should get him started. Also, no coupler. It will break at the coupler joint. The upper section should sleeve over the motor, using the motor as the coupler. I'm giving away a few secrets here, but he'll need all the help he can get. I wish him the best of luck. If it survives, I do not think he will say it was no big deal. It is one heck of an engineering challenge, one that I could not meet until I got away from composites. I may try again in the future someday, when I forget what it's like to shred expensive electronics. If anyone else want to fly this motor in the future, I may offer the same deal, but I would hope that you witness a flight before accepting, because you might change your mind. Keeping the fins on is difficult, but not folding the upper airframe section in half is harder. It will probably render your rocket single use even if it survives due to ablation. The 54mm version of this motor will have even higher performance than the 38mm L due to the lower mass fraction and higher thrust. I shudder. Mike F. In a message dated 10/9/2009 8:00:32 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, guentherchristopher at gmail.com writes: Mike The inner diameter has to be 54mm. Is there a rule on outer diameter? Ray _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From IBELCHLOUD at aol.com Sat Oct 10 01:33:30 2009 From: IBELCHLOUD at aol.com (IBELCHLOUD at aol.com) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 04:33:30 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: Mike's motor is 54mm. There are no 54mm commercial M loads on the market. Please do some research in the future before opening your "mouth". Lou From kent.newman at comcast.net Sat Oct 10 02:52:53 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 02:52:53 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000301ca498f$7032aa40$5097fec0$@newman@comcast.net> No change on the mix from the first flight, Mike. Zn without checking? That could have a bit of an impact J K From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:13 PM To: kent.newman at comcast.net; jhadv at pacifier.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted Too much metal in the propellant. :) I did that once. Flew fine on no metals load, then loaded up a high zinc and didn't check CP/CG. Loopy. Mike F. In a message dated 10/9/2009 7:07:26 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, kent.newman at comcast.net writes: Or something close to that explanation :-) From scott at scottsrockets.com Sat Oct 10 04:52:59 2009 From: scott at scottsrockets.com (Scott T Bowers) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 04:52:59 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted In-Reply-To: <000301ca498f$7032aa40$5097fec0$@newman@comcast.net> References: <000301ca498f$7032aa40$5097fec0$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: Wilkerson and I found that out the hard way at brothers a few years ago, looped a 75mm M zinc motor right over the flight line....burned off enough to go stable and went near straight up to over 9K. 9K with a loop, pretty good motor.... Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Kent Newman Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 2:53 AM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: Rockets NW list Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted No change on the mix from the first flight, Mike. Zn without checking? That could have a bit of an impact J K From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:13 PM To: kent.newman at comcast.net; jhadv at pacifier.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted Too much metal in the propellant. :) I did that once. Flew fine on no metals load, then loaded up a high zinc and didn't check CP/CG. Loopy. Mike F. In a message dated 10/9/2009 7:07:26 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, kent.newman at comcast.net writes: Or something close to that explanation :-) _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From MartyWeiser at comcast.net Sat Oct 10 06:24:26 2009 From: MartyWeiser at comcast.net (Marty Weiser) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 06:24:26 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <005101ca49ac$fe41d410$fac57c30$@net> Scott - If you slide the electronics bay into a solid tube you can get two separation points - one from the fin can/motor and the other at the nose cone. Using a nice long section of the motor as the coupler is the key - it is very rigid and will not deform and start the fold like a standard coupler when subjected to bending moments. - Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 10:17 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; guentherchristopher at gmail.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust I was wondering about the coupler thing - I coun't come up with anything beyond simply kicking the whole motor out in lieue of traditional separation. You are truly a psycho - and i mean that as a high compliment. -----Original Message----- From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Friday, October 9, 2009 08:56 PM To: guentherchristopher at gmail.com, lawndart.robert at gmail.com Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust No, but it should not contain centering rings, nor be 100 layers of carbon cloth either. I think somewhere between .0625" and .095" wall in carbon might do the trick, providing you use the right lay-up technique, probably some uni-directional, and some sleeving in alternating layers, combined with high temp epoxy and proper post curing. The airframe and nosecone should weigh around 3 lbs. or less. The 38mm version with aluminum airframe comes in at under 2 lbs. For the record, Paul has contacted me off list to accept the challenge. The above hints should get him started. Also, no coupler. It will break at the coupler joint. The upper section should sleeve over the motor, using the motor as the coupler. I'm giving away a few secrets here, but he'll need all the help he can get. I wish him the best of luck. If it survives, I do not think he will say it was no big deal. It is one heck of an engineering challenge, one that I could not meet until I got away from composites. I may try again in the future someday, when I forget what it's like to shred expensive electronics. If anyone else want to fly this motor in the future, I may offer the same deal, but I would hope that you witness a flight before accepting, because you might change your mind. Keeping the fins on is difficult, but not folding the upper airframe section in half is harder. It will probably render your rocket single use even if it survives due to ablation. The 54mm version of this motor will have even higher performance than the 38mm L due to the lower mass fraction and higher thrust. I shudder. Mike F. In a message dated 10/9/2009 8:00:32 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, guentherchristopher at gmail.com writes: Mike The inner diameter has to be 54mm. Is there a rule on outer diameter? Ray _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From absworld at cet.com Sat Oct 10 08:12:35 2009 From: absworld at cet.com (Bob & Ann Yanecek) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 08:12:35 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <008201ca49bc$1ab99650$502cc2f0$@com> Regarding :"I would hope that you witness a flight before accepting," Witness or just be present when the thing goes BANGONE? I've done the latter but still waiting to actually see something. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Mfreptiles at aol.com Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 8:56 PM To: guentherchristopher at gmail.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com Cc: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust No, but it should not contain centering rings, nor be 100 layers of carbon cloth either. I think somewhere between .0625" and .095" wall in carbon might do the trick, providing you use the right lay-up technique, probably some uni-directional, and some sleeving in alternating layers, combined with high temp epoxy and proper post curing. The airframe and nosecone should weigh around 3 lbs. or less. The 38mm version with aluminum airframe comes in at under 2 lbs. For the record, Paul has contacted me off list to accept the challenge. The above hints should get him started. Also, no coupler. It will break at the coupler joint. The upper section should sleeve over the motor, using the motor as the coupler. I'm giving away a few secrets here, but he'll need all the help he can get. I wish him the best of luck. If it survives, I do not think he will say it was no big deal. It is one heck of an engineering challenge, one that I could not meet until I got away from composites. I may try again in the future someday, when I forget what it's like to shred expensive electronics. If anyone else want to fly this motor in the future, I may offer the same deal, but I would hope that you witness a flight before accepting, because you might change your mind. Keeping the fins on is difficult, but not folding the upper airframe section in half is harder. It will probably render your rocket single use even if it survives due to ablation. The 54mm version of this motor will have even higher performance than the 38mm L due to the lower mass fraction and higher thrust. I shudder. Mike F. In a message dated 10/9/2009 8:00:32 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, guentherchristopher at gmail.com writes: Mike The inner diameter has to be 54mm. Is there a rule on outer diameter? Ray _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From tnetcenter at gmail.com Sat Oct 10 09:44:34 2009 From: tnetcenter at gmail.com (Jeff Moore) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 09:44:34 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted References: <000301ca498f$7032aa40$5097fec0$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: <4F0E4B3C8AC44A55B708C3C4416EBFE7@TNTCENTER> I remember that flight -- it had some serious pucker factor to it! :-) Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott T Bowers" Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted Wilkerson and I found that out the hard way at brothers a few years ago, looped a 75mm M zinc motor right over the flight line....burned off enough to go stable and went near straight up to over 9K. 9K with a loop, pretty good motor.... Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Kent Newman Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 2:53 AM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: Rockets NW list Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted No change on the mix from the first flight, Mike. Zn without checking? That could have a bit of an impact J K From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:13 PM To: kent.newman at comcast.net; jhadv at pacifier.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted Too much metal in the propellant. :) I did that once. Flew fine on no metals load, then loaded up a high zinc and didn't check CP/CG. Loopy. Mike F. In a message dated 10/9/2009 7:07:26 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, kent.newman at comcast.net writes: Or something close to that explanation :-) _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Mfreptiles at aol.com Sat Oct 10 10:15:35 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:15:35 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted Message-ID: Yeah, not too bright on my part. Luckily it was just a 38mm I motor to test a prototype of a Velociraptor Jr. and there were only two flyers present, myself and John Hornsby. Took me a few minutes to figure out why it was unstable on its second flight with the same casing size as the first flight. Duh.... Propellant density. Mike F. In a message dated 10/10/2009 2:52:55 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, kent.newman at comcast.net writes: No change on the mix from the first flight, Mike. Zn without checking? That could have a bit of an impact J From kent.newman at comcast.net Sat Oct 10 10:18:10 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 10:18:10 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001301ca49cd$a4cecca0$ee6c65e0$@newman@comcast.net> Maybe, but when I think of my "list" of things that were simply too obvious to miss, and yet, I missed them, that doesn't sound too bad. Kent From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 10:16 AM To: kent.newman at comcast.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted Yeah, not too bright on my part. Luckily it was just a 38mm I motor to test a prototype of a Velociraptor Jr. and there were only two flyers present, myself and John Hornsby. Took me a few minutes to figure out why it was unstable on its second flight with the same casing size as the first flight. Duh.... Propellant density. Mike F. In a message dated 10/10/2009 2:52:55 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, kent.newman at comcast.net writes: No change on the mix from the first flight, Mike. Zn without checking? That could have a bit of an impact J From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Sat Oct 10 10:26:41 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (steve-c at ix.netcom.com) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 10:26:41 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED Message-ID: <20452110.1255195602070.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Dang - talk about creapy elegance. Then y'all are the first to snivvel at the cost for such support. My take? Run a little scared - meaning, if you choose to use a mental check vs. a written check list then don't be so bold to think you got everything right the first time - check it again and remember those somewhat paranoid ways and it goes a long way to mitigate errors - it's a PITA either way and when it becomes less of a chore then it comes down to being lucky. Likely in the minority on this one. /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Fred Azinger >Sent: Oct 9, 2009 8:08 PM >To: "'W. Raymond Stoner'" , jhadv at pacifier.com >Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED > >One would think it would be a simple check....and easy fix if you see -1G on >the pad instead of +1G...... >Too darn simple to be an excusable omission IMHO. > >Then again -- I know only a few altimeters are "smart" enough to do this >right..... >With all the team watching and double checking the programming and wiring, >it is hard to believe we missed the upside-down part....it was different >from the 3 other altimeters we were programming at the same time.... > >Murphy is a rat bastard.... > > >-----Original Message----- >From: W. Raymond Stoner [mailto:raystoner99 at comcast.net] >Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:48 PM >To: 'Fred Azinger'; jhadv at pacifier.com >Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED > >I've always wondered why this is so... > >>From a programming standpoint, wouldn't it be easy to detect +1g or -1G upon >power up and adjust based on that condition? At that point a "this end up" >requirement no longer matters. > >I must not be seeing something that's obvious to the programmer...AFAIK all >altimeters that use accelerometers work this way. > >Ray > >-----Original Message----- >From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >On Behalf Of Fred Azinger >Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:54 PM >To: jhadv at pacifier.com >Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED > >UPSIDE-DOWN Altimeter..... >Satisfied ACC<0; VEL<0 and ALTacceleration..... > > >-----Original Message----- >From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >On Behalf Of jhadv at pacifier.com >Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:27 PM >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] VIDEO POSTED > >All; > I just had a chance to watch the video Fred posted. Great video. >However, is there any sophisticated reason for a rocket behaving like >that? The only one I can think of is it was unstable at the tower >before launch. If it was unstable at the tower then that's a bit of a >problem isn't is? > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From bwhitemarsh at comcast.net Sat Oct 10 10:57:26 2009 From: bwhitemarsh at comcast.net (bwhitemarsh at comcast.net) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 17:57:26 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1827260580.4399591255197446988.JavaMail.root@sz0028a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Christopher: I got my level 2 cert this year at FITS.? I went to BALLS this year as an observer to see how the "Big Boys" do it.? I took away?a couple of?major learning points:? (1)? There is a huge difference between a Level 2 rocket and a Level 3 project.? I observed at least 2 shredded Level 3 attempts at BALLS.? It is apparent to me that a level three project is something more than just, "build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F's or Ray's motor."? (2)? There is a lot to be learned by watching more advanced fliers, asking questions, and observing their results.? By my count, you are currently one for two?in Level 1 flights.? I have read your posted questions and it is apparent that you (like manyof us) still have a lot to learn about high power rocketry before "cramming a motor" in an L3 project.? And that doesn't even take into account the massive increase in complexity of a ridiculous thrust, minimum-diameter project that has even the "Big Boys" wondering if it can be done.? Ask Bob Yanacek about his last minimum-diameter project.? Just my two cents, but I think there is a lot to be gained from stepping back, talking less,?getting some L1 and L2 flights under your belt, and trying to glean as much as you can from those who have been there and done that before insulting Mike F and others with thoughts of cramming their motors in your L3 project.? I know I'll be spending some serious time flying Level 2 before even thinking about stepping up.? No offense intended. Bryan Whitemarsh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> To: "W. Raymond Stoner " Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com Sent: Friday, October 9, 2009 8:06:04 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust That is why I build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F. 's or Ray's motor. On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM, W. Raymond Stoner wrote: > You can't cert on a research motor. > Ray > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > On Behalf Of Robert Krausert > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:51 PM > To: Christopher Guenther ; Dennis S Winningstad > Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > Chris, > You want to get your L3 cert on a 54mm 72 inch motor that will exceed 100+ > g's and push mach 3 for several seconds? For me, I'd ask for a L3 sponsor > so > > I could fly. But I'd never use that for my L3. This motor will out perform > most military spec missiles. I'd keep away from it except for fun. As a > cert > > flight, scary. Save the L3 cert flight for something you have control over. > Mike's motor is more of a "just try to survive." > > Think of trying to build a uniform to survive an impact from a logging > truck > > approaching for a direct hit at 120 mph. I know I'd become a red splatter > on > > the road. Your rocket needs to go from zero to "oh my god!!" in about 0.3 > seconds. > > You might want to reconsider. That is all up to you. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> > To: "Dennis S Winningstad " < winningstad @comcast.net> > Cc: > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:36 PM > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > >I know I would have to be L3. ?I would use it to attempt a cert for L3. > > Since I built everything but the motor it would qualify would it not? ?I > > plan to be L2 somewhere mid Rocketober . ?If not then deffinently before > > next > > BALLS. ?That would be a great time to Cert L3. > > > > Chris Guenther > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Dennis S Winningstad < > > winningstad @comcast.net> wrote: > > > >> Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? ?Then what's the problem????????????? > >> > >> Dennis S Winningstad > >> 503-781-3529 > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > >> ?On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM > >> To: 'Christopher Guenther' ; Mfreptiles @ aol .com > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > >> > >> You need to be L3 to fly this motor. > >> > >> Ray > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > >> On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM > >> To: Mfreptiles @ aol .com > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > >> > >> You have peaked my interest. ?I would love to build the vehicle. ?I love > >> building rockets. ?As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps my > >> hands busy and my mind active. ?(wife had better benefits then I did > when > >> the kids were born) > >> > >> Chris Guenther > >> > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> wrote: > >> > >> > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. ?The motor is > >> ?72" > >> > long. > >> > > >> > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good > >> > margin. ?Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this > >> > is > >> a > >> > BALLS flight. > >> > > >> > Mike F. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > >> > lawndart . robert @ gmail .com writes: > >> > > >> > Mike, > >> > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly ?your > >> > 54mm > >> > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use ?it > >> > during > >> > an > >> > EX day next year. > >> > > >> > Just send me the known length and ?weight. Plus the impulse parameters > >> > if > >> > you > >> > have them. I'll be happy to ?bring a rocket to fly it. > >> > > >> > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try ?to make it work. > >> > > >> > Cheers, > >> > Robert > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> > From: < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> > >> > To: < sutchek @ sbcglobal .net>; ?; > >> > > >> > Sent: ?Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM > >> > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket ?tube loading / thrust > >> > > >> > > >> > > Your use of caps indicates ?yelling/confrontation. ?Maybe not your > >> > intent, > >> > > but that's ?the way it reads. > >> > > > >> > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor ?offer. ?I want it to fly > >> > > but > >> am > >> > > burned out on building ?airframes. ?If you are serious, let me know > >> > before > >> > > someone ?else speaks for it. > >> > > > >> > > Mike F. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > In a ?message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > >> > > ? sutchek @ sbcglobal .net writes: > >> > > > >> > > I DID ?NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ?ANYONE > >> > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > ?Rockets mailing list > >> > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> > > ? http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Rockets mailing list > >> > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > >> > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets@ rocketsnw .com http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets ?? From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Sat Oct 10 12:07:59 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (steve-c at ix.netcom.com) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:07:59 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted Message-ID: <25591124.1255201679907.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net> I remember that flight - too unreal, but it happened - just like one would expect to see in a cartoon. /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Scott T Bowers >Sent: Oct 10, 2009 7:52 AM >To: 'Kent Newman' , Mfreptiles at aol.com >Cc: 'Rockets NW list' >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > >Wilkerson and I found that out the hard way at brothers a few years ago, >looped a 75mm M zinc motor right over the flight line....burned off enough >to go stable and went near straight up to over 9K. 9K with a loop, pretty >good motor.... > > >Scott T. Bowers >www.scottsrockets.com > > >-----Original Message----- >From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >On Behalf Of Kent Newman >Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 2:53 AM >To: Mfreptiles at aol.com >Cc: Rockets NW list >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > >No change on the mix from the first flight, Mike. > > > >Zn without checking? That could have a bit of an impact J > > > >K > > > >From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] >Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:13 PM >To: kent.newman at comcast.net; jhadv at pacifier.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > > > >Too much metal in the propellant. :) I did that once. Flew fine on no >metals load, then loaded up a high zinc and didn't check CP/CG. Loopy. > > > >Mike F. > > > >In a message dated 10/9/2009 7:07:26 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >kent.newman at comcast.net writes: > >Or something close to that explanation :-) > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From jhadv at pacifier.com Sat Oct 10 12:07:59 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (Paul Bogdanich) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 12:07:59 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20091010120340.03926e68@mail.iinet.com> Please correct me if I am wrong but doesn't one have to be a Level III to fly a Level III motor other than for a cert attempt? Further what LCO is going to let a minimum diameter rocket built out of phenolic and cardboard go with one of Fischer's 54s in it? I think Mike's offer was for more advanced flyers and the rest of this just so much hot air. From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Sat Oct 10 12:12:10 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 12:12:10 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <1827260580.4399591255197446988.JavaMail.root@sz0028a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> References: <1827260580.4399591255197446988.JavaMail.root@sz0028a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: Those of you out there that are attempting to Bash my idea are the reason so few people come to the hobby or even stay in for very long. You should be offering encouragement instead. Lucky for me the more I get told by people that are not a part of the conversation that I can't do it the more apt I am to do it! Most of this conversation was taken off list for that reason and to keep some thing secret from the rest(trade secrets, gotta keep em). So as for most of you who are also going to chip your 2 cents in as to why I or anyone else can't save it. You will just be fueling my ambitions and most likely dousing others. Maybe mix in some advice and encouragement with your criticism. * What does anyone gain in experience if they do not attempt to try?* On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:57 AM, wrote: > > > Christopher: > > I got my level 2 cert this year at FITS. I went to BALLS this year as an > observer to see how the "Big Boys" do it. I took away a couple of major > learning points: (1) There is a huge difference between a Level 2 rocket > and a Level 3 project. I observed at least 2 shredded Level 3 attempts at > BALLS. It is apparent to me that a level three project is something more > than just, "build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F's or Ray's motor." > (2) There is a lot to be learned by watching more advanced fliers, asking > questions, and observing their results. By my count, you are currently one > for two in Level 1 flights. I have read your posted questions and it is > apparent that you (like manyof us) still have a lot to learn about high > power rocketry before "cramming a motor" in an L3 project. And that doesn't > even take into account the massive increase in complexity of a ridiculous > thrust, minimum-diameter project that has even the "Big Boys" wondering if > it can be done. Ask Bob Yanacek about his last minimum-diameter project. > > Just my two cents, but I think there is a lot to be gained from stepping > back, talking less, getting some L1 and L2 flights under your belt, and > trying to glean as much as you can from those who have been there and done > that before insulting Mike F and others with thoughts of cramming their > motors in your L3 project. I know I'll be spending some serious time flying > Level 2 before even thinking about stepping up. No offense intended. > > > > Bryan Whitemarsh > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> > To: "W. Raymond Stoner " > Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > Sent: Friday, October 9, 2009 8:06:04 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > That is why I build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F. 's or Ray's > motor. > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM, W. Raymond Stoner > wrote: > > > You can't cert on a research motor. > > Ray > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com [ mailto :rockets-bounces at rocketsnw .com] > > On Behalf Of Robert Krausert > > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:51 PM > > To: Christopher Guenther ; Dennis S Winningstad > > Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > > Chris, > > You want to get your L3 cert on a 54mm 72 inch motor that will exceed > 100+ > > g's and push mach 3 for several seconds? For me, I'd ask for a L3 sponsor > > so > > > > I could fly. But I'd never use that for my L3. This motor will out > perform > > most military spec missiles. I'd keep away from it except for fun. As a > > cert > > > > flight, scary. Save the L3 cert flight for something you have control > over. > > Mike's motor is more of a "just try to survive." > > > > Think of trying to build a uniform to survive an impact from a logging > > truck > > > > approaching for a direct hit at 120 mph. I know I'd become a red splatter > > on > > > > the road. Your rocket needs to go from zero to "oh my god!!" in about 0.3 > > seconds. > > > > You might want to reconsider. That is all up to you. > > > > Cheers, > > Robert > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> > > To: "Dennis S Winningstad " < winningstad @comcast.net> > > Cc: > > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:36 PM > > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > > > > >I know I would have to be L3. I would use it to attempt a cert for L3. > > > Since I built everything but the motor it would qualify would it not? > I > > > plan to be L2 somewhere mid Rocketober . If not then deffinently > before > > > next > > > BALLS. That would be a great time to Cert L3. > > > > > > Chris Guenther > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Dennis S Winningstad < > > > winningstad @comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > >> Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? Then what's the problem????????????? > > >> > > >> Dennis S Winningstad > > >> 503-781-3529 > > >> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com > > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > > >> On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner > > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM > > >> To: 'Christopher Guenther' ; Mfreptiles @ aol .com > > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > >> > > >> You need to be L3 to fly this motor. > > >> > > >> Ray > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com > > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > > >> On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM > > >> To: Mfreptiles @ aol .com > > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > >> > > >> You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I > love > > >> building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps > my > > >> hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did > > when > > >> the kids were born) > > >> > > >> Chris Guenther > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> wrote: > > >> > > >> > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor > is > > >> 72" > > >> > long. > > >> > > > >> > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a > good > > >> > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, > this > > >> > is > > >> a > > >> > BALLS flight. > > >> > > > >> > Mike F. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > >> > lawndart . robert @ gmail .com writes: > > >> > > > >> > Mike, > > >> > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your > > >> > 54mm > > >> > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it > > >> > during > > >> > an > > >> > EX day next year. > > >> > > > >> > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse > parameters > > >> > if > > >> > you > > >> > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. > > >> > > > >> > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. > > >> > > > >> > Cheers, > > >> > Robert > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > > >> > From: < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> > > >> > To: < sutchek @ sbcglobal .net>; ; > > >> > > > >> > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM > > >> > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your > > >> > intent, > > >> > > but that's the way it reads. > > >> > > > > >> > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly > > >> > > but > > >> am > > >> > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me > know > > >> > before > > >> > > someone else speaks for it. > > >> > > > > >> > > Mike F. > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > >> > > sutchek @ sbcglobal .net writes: > > >> > > > > >> > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > > >> > > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > Rockets mailing list > > >> > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > >> > Rockets mailing list > > >> > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > > >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Rockets mailing list > > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Rockets mailing list > > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Rockets mailing list > > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Sat Oct 10 12:21:43 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 12:21:43 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted References: <25591124.1255201679907.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <8F1D32FF0B0F4DE4A3080924413D6814@LaptopKrausert> I remember once having a copy of a video of a rocket that did a 360 and contiued on its journey. I'm trying remember the name. Might be a loss of brain cells, but what came to mind is "Orange Crush." >From what I can recall - it was maybe 1000 feet up, spun, and then went on its way. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Scott T Bowers" ; "'Kent Newman'" ; Cc: "'Rockets NW list'" Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 12:07 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted >I remember that flight - too unreal, but it happened - just like one would >expect to see in a cartoon. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: Scott T Bowers >>Sent: Oct 10, 2009 7:52 AM >>To: 'Kent Newman' , Mfreptiles at aol.com >>Cc: 'Rockets NW list' >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted >> >>Wilkerson and I found that out the hard way at brothers a few years ago, >>looped a 75mm M zinc motor right over the flight line....burned off enough >>to go stable and went near straight up to over 9K. 9K with a loop, pretty >>good motor.... >> >> >>Scott T. Bowers >>www.scottsrockets.com >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >>On Behalf Of Kent Newman >>Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 2:53 AM >>To: Mfreptiles at aol.com >>Cc: Rockets NW list >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted >> >>No change on the mix from the first flight, Mike. >> >> >> >>Zn without checking? That could have a bit of an impact J >> >> >> >>K >> >> >> >>From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] >>Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:13 PM >>To: kent.newman at comcast.net; jhadv at pacifier.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted >> >> >> >>Too much metal in the propellant. :) I did that once. Flew fine on no >>metals load, then loaded up a high zinc and didn't check CP/CG. Loopy. >> >> >> >>Mike F. >> >> >> >>In a message dated 10/9/2009 7:07:26 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >>kent.newman at comcast.net writes: >> >>Or something close to that explanation :-) >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From winningstad at comcast.net Sat Oct 10 12:22:36 2009 From: winningstad at comcast.net (Dennis S Winningstad) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 12:22:36 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <1827260580.4399591255197446988.JavaMail.root@sz0028a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> References: <1827260580.4399591255197446988.JavaMail.root@sz0028a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <0c7b01ca49df$06c292f0$1447b8d0$@net> The motors are near or at when one needs a metal airframe & fins... Dennis S Winningstad 503-781-3529 -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of bwhitemarsh at comcast.net Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 10:57 AM To: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Christopher: I got my level 2 cert this year at FITS. I went to BALLS this year as an observer to see how the "Big Boys" do it. I took awaya couple ofmajor learning points: (1) There is a huge difference between a Level 2 rocket and a Level 3 project. I observed at least 2 shredded Level 3 attempts at BALLS. It is apparent to me that a level three project is something more than just, "build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F's or Ray's motor." (2) There is a lot to be learned by watching more advanced fliers, asking questions, and observing their results. By my count, you are currently one for twoin Level 1 flights. I have read your posted questions and it is apparent that you (like manyof us) still have a lot to learn about high power rocketry before "cramming a motor" in an L3 project. And that doesn't even take into account the massive increase in complexity of a ridiculous thrust, minimum-diameter project that has even the "Big Boys" wondering if it can be done. Ask Bob Yanacek about his last minimum-diameter project. Just my two cents, but I think there is a lot to be gained from stepping back, talking less,getting some L1 and L2 flights under your belt, and trying to glean as much as you can from those who have been there and done that before insulting Mike F and others with thoughts of cramming their motors in your L3 project. I know I'll be spending some serious time flying Level 2 before even thinking about stepping up. No offense intended. Bryan Whitemarsh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> To: "W. Raymond Stoner " Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com Sent: Friday, October 9, 2009 8:06:04 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust That is why I build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F. 's or Ray's motor. On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM, W. Raymond Stoner wrote: > You can't cert on a research motor. > Ray > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > On Behalf Of Robert Krausert > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:51 PM > To: Christopher Guenther ; Dennis S Winningstad > Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > Chris, > You want to get your L3 cert on a 54mm 72 inch motor that will exceed 100+ > g's and push mach 3 for several seconds? For me, I'd ask for a L3 sponsor > so > > I could fly. But I'd never use that for my L3. This motor will out perform > most military spec missiles. I'd keep away from it except for fun. As a > cert > > flight, scary. Save the L3 cert flight for something you have control over. > Mike's motor is more of a "just try to survive." > > Think of trying to build a uniform to survive an impact from a logging > truck > > approaching for a direct hit at 120 mph. I know I'd become a red splatter > on > > the road. Your rocket needs to go from zero to "oh my god!!" in about 0.3 > seconds. > > You might want to reconsider. That is all up to you. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> > To: "Dennis S Winningstad " < winningstad @comcast.net> > Cc: > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:36 PM > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > >I know I would have to be L3. I would use it to attempt a cert for L3. > > Since I built everything but the motor it would qualify would it not? I > > plan to be L2 somewhere mid Rocketober . If not then deffinently before > > next > > BALLS. That would be a great time to Cert L3. > > > > Chris Guenther > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Dennis S Winningstad < > > winningstad @comcast.net> wrote: > > > >> Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? Then what's the problem????????????? > >> > >> Dennis S Winningstad > >> 503-781-3529 > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > >> On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM > >> To: 'Christopher Guenther' ; Mfreptiles @ aol .com > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > >> > >> You need to be L3 to fly this motor. > >> > >> Ray > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > >> On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM > >> To: Mfreptiles @ aol .com > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > >> > >> You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I love > >> building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps my > >> hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did > when > >> the kids were born) > >> > >> Chris Guenther > >> > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> wrote: > >> > >> > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is > >> 72" > >> > long. > >> > > >> > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good > >> > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this > >> > is > >> a > >> > BALLS flight. > >> > > >> > Mike F. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > >> > lawndart . robert @ gmail .com writes: > >> > > >> > Mike, > >> > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your > >> > 54mm > >> > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it > >> > during > >> > an > >> > EX day next year. > >> > > >> > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters > >> > if > >> > you > >> > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. > >> > > >> > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. > >> > > >> > Cheers, > >> > Robert > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> > From: < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> > >> > To: < sutchek @ sbcglobal .net>; ; > >> > > >> > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM > >> > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > >> > > >> > > >> > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your > >> > intent, > >> > > but that's the way it reads. > >> > > > >> > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly > >> > > but > >> am > >> > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know > >> > before > >> > > someone else speaks for it. > >> > > > >> > > Mike F. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > >> > > sutchek @ sbcglobal .net writes: > >> > > > >> > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > >> > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > Rockets mailing list > >> > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Rockets mailing list > >> > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > >> > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets@ rocketsnw .com http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Sat Oct 10 12:52:52 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (steve-c at ix.netcom.com) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 12:52:52 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted Message-ID: <29046108.1255204372505.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> I think Orange Crush was a rocket flown by a fellow in the Idaho club and if memory serves correctly it was at an XPRS event. I was with Alex and we couldn't believe our eyes, but now thinking about the trap others have fallen into... Over-stability and optimum performance are seemingly mutually exclusive making this topic more than just trivial. /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Robert Krausert >Sent: Oct 10, 2009 12:21 PM >To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com, Scott T Bowers , 'Kent Newman' , Mfreptiles at aol.com >Cc: 'Rockets NW list' >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > >I remember once having a copy of a video of a rocket that did a 360 and >contiued on its journey. I'm trying remember the name. Might be a loss of >brain cells, but what came to mind is "Orange Crush." > >From what I can recall - it was maybe 1000 feet up, spun, and then went on >its way. > >Cheers, >Robert > >----- Original Message ----- >From: >To: "Scott T Bowers" ; "'Kent Newman'" >; >Cc: "'Rockets NW list'" >Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 12:07 PM >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > > >>I remember that flight - too unreal, but it happened - just like one would >>expect to see in a cartoon. /Steve >> >> -----Original Message----- >>>From: Scott T Bowers >>>Sent: Oct 10, 2009 7:52 AM >>>To: 'Kent Newman' , Mfreptiles at aol.com >>>Cc: 'Rockets NW list' >>>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted >>> >>>Wilkerson and I found that out the hard way at brothers a few years ago, >>>looped a 75mm M zinc motor right over the flight line....burned off enough >>>to go stable and went near straight up to over 9K. 9K with a loop, pretty >>>good motor.... >>> >>> >>>Scott T. Bowers >>>www.scottsrockets.com >>> >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >>>On Behalf Of Kent Newman >>>Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 2:53 AM >>>To: Mfreptiles at aol.com >>>Cc: Rockets NW list >>>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted >>> >>>No change on the mix from the first flight, Mike. >>> >>> >>> >>>Zn without checking? That could have a bit of an impact J >>> >>> >>> >>>K >>> >>> >>> >>>From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] >>>Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:13 PM >>>To: kent.newman at comcast.net; jhadv at pacifier.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted >>> >>> >>> >>>Too much metal in the propellant. :) I did that once. Flew fine on no >>>metals load, then loaded up a high zinc and didn't check CP/CG. Loopy. >>> >>> >>> >>>Mike F. >>> >>> >>> >>>In a message dated 10/9/2009 7:07:26 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >>>kent.newman at comcast.net writes: >>> >>>Or something close to that explanation :-) >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>Rockets mailing list >>>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>Rockets mailing list >>>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Sat Oct 10 13:08:56 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:08:56 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust References: <1827260580.4399591255197446988.JavaMail.root@sz0028a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <2143218551D44C0784BB409DA883FB29@LaptopKrausert> Chris, Holy polar cats, Batman. I know Robin, we've upset a fellow flyer. I'll be the first to apologize. I'd never want to be thought of trying to squelch someone's ambitions. We are in this hobby for the same reason, the adventures of ametuer rocketry. But we all have different goals and how fast to get to there. I know several people that have enjoyed flying L1 and occasionally L2 motors for years and they're happy. I also know several that if the motor doesn't weigh at least 15 pounds, it isn't a motor. So if I came across critcizing your ambitions, I didn't attempt to do that. You'll achieve your goals if you set a course to them. Just one thing to remember. While you're exploring this hobby, the Pacific Northwest has some of the greatest rocketeers in the world. I'm not one of them. But this list and NW area is full of history and knowledge. Something you can seriously benefit from, if you ask and listen. I don't think anyone would ever say, "Stop, it's way over your head." I'd never say that. But you might hear, "Stop, rethink and make sure you've considered and comprehended ideas, and then continue." In other words, some might see, read or hear something that might lend to a little mentoring and or attention. And if all goes to plan, you'll be a L2 in just one week. Hope that helps. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Guenther" To: ; Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > Those of you out there that are attempting to Bash my idea are the reason > so > few people come to the hobby or even stay in for very long. You should be > offering encouragement instead. Lucky for me the more I get told by > people > that are not a part of the conversation that I can't do it the more apt I > am > to do it! Most of this conversation was taken off list for that reason > and > to keep some thing secret from the rest(trade secrets, gotta keep em). So > as for most of you who are also going to chip your 2 cents in as to why I > or > anyone else can't save it. You will just be fueling my ambitions and most > likely dousing others. Maybe mix in some advice and encouragement with > your > criticism. * What does anyone gain in experience if they do not attempt to > try?* > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:57 AM, wrote: > >> >> >> Christopher: >> >> I got my level 2 cert this year at FITS. I went to BALLS this year as an >> observer to see how the "Big Boys" do it. I took away a couple of major >> learning points: (1) There is a huge difference between a Level 2 >> rocket >> and a Level 3 project. I observed at least 2 shredded Level 3 attempts >> at >> BALLS. It is apparent to me that a level three project is something more >> than just, "build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F's or Ray's >> motor." >> (2) There is a lot to be learned by watching more advanced fliers, >> asking >> questions, and observing their results. By my count, you are currently >> one >> for two in Level 1 flights. I have read your posted questions and it is >> apparent that you (like manyof us) still have a lot to learn about high >> power rocketry before "cramming a motor" in an L3 project. And that >> doesn't >> even take into account the massive increase in complexity of a ridiculous >> thrust, minimum-diameter project that has even the "Big Boys" wondering >> if >> it can be done. Ask Bob Yanacek about his last minimum-diameter project. >> >> Just my two cents, but I think there is a lot to be gained from stepping >> back, talking less, getting some L1 and L2 flights under your belt, and >> trying to glean as much as you can from those who have been there and >> done >> that before insulting Mike F and others with thoughts of cramming their >> motors in your L3 project. I know I'll be spending some serious time >> flying >> Level 2 before even thinking about stepping up. No offense intended. >> >> >> >> Bryan Whitemarsh >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> >> To: "W. Raymond Stoner " >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com >> Sent: Friday, October 9, 2009 8:06:04 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >> >> That is why I build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F. 's or Ray's >> motor. >> >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM, W. Raymond Stoner >> wrote: >> >> > You can't cert on a research motor. >> > Ray >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com [ mailto >> > :rockets-bounces at rocketsnw .com] >> > On Behalf Of Robert Krausert >> > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:51 PM >> > To: Christopher Guenther ; Dennis S Winningstad >> > Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com >> > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >> > >> > Chris, >> > You want to get your L3 cert on a 54mm 72 inch motor that will exceed >> 100+ >> > g's and push mach 3 for several seconds? For me, I'd ask for a L3 >> > sponsor >> > so >> > >> > I could fly. But I'd never use that for my L3. This motor will out >> perform >> > most military spec missiles. I'd keep away from it except for fun. As a >> > cert >> > >> > flight, scary. Save the L3 cert flight for something you have control >> over. >> > Mike's motor is more of a "just try to survive." >> > >> > Think of trying to build a uniform to survive an impact from a logging >> > truck >> > >> > approaching for a direct hit at 120 mph. I know I'd become a red >> > splatter >> > on >> > >> > the road. Your rocket needs to go from zero to "oh my god!!" in about >> > 0.3 >> > seconds. >> > >> > You might want to reconsider. That is all up to you. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Robert >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> >> > To: "Dennis S Winningstad " < winningstad @comcast.net> >> > Cc: >> > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:36 PM >> > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >> > >> > >> > >I know I would have to be L3. I would use it to attempt a cert for >> > >L3. >> > > Since I built everything but the motor it would qualify would it not? >> I >> > > plan to be L2 somewhere mid Rocketober . If not then deffinently >> before >> > > next >> > > BALLS. That would be a great time to Cert L3. >> > > >> > > Chris Guenther >> > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Dennis S Winningstad < >> > > winningstad @comcast.net> wrote: >> > > >> > >> Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? Then what's the problem????????????? >> > >> >> > >> Dennis S Winningstad >> > >> 503-781-3529 >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> -----Original Message----- >> > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com >> > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] >> > >> On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner >> > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM >> > >> To: 'Christopher Guenther' ; Mfreptiles @ aol .com >> > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com >> > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >> > >> >> > >> You need to be L3 to fly this motor. >> > >> >> > >> Ray >> > >> >> > >> -----Original Message----- >> > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com >> > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] >> > >> On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther >> > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM >> > >> To: Mfreptiles @ aol .com >> > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com >> > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >> > >> >> > >> You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I >> love >> > >> building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building >> > >> keeps >> my >> > >> hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did >> > when >> > >> the kids were born) >> > >> >> > >> Chris Guenther >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor >> is >> > >> 72" >> > >> > long. >> > >> > >> > >> > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a >> good >> > >> > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, >> this >> > >> > is >> > >> a >> > >> > BALLS flight. >> > >> > >> > >> > Mike F. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >> > >> > lawndart . robert @ gmail .com writes: >> > >> > >> > >> > Mike, >> > >> > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly >> > >> > your >> > >> > 54mm >> > >> > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it >> > >> > during >> > >> > an >> > >> > EX day next year. >> > >> > >> > >> > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse >> parameters >> > >> > if >> > >> > you >> > >> > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. >> > >> > >> > >> > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. >> > >> > >> > >> > Cheers, >> > >> > Robert >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > >> > From: < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> >> > >> > To: < sutchek @ sbcglobal .net>; ; >> > >> > >> > >> > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM >> > >> > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not >> > >> > > your >> > >> > intent, >> > >> > > but that's the way it reads. >> > >> > > >> > >> > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to >> > >> > > fly >> > >> > > but >> > >> am >> > >> > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me >> know >> > >> > before >> > >> > > someone else speaks for it. >> > >> > > >> > >> > > Mike F. >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight >> > >> > > Time, >> > >> > > sutchek @ sbcglobal .net writes: >> > >> > > >> > >> > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE >> > >> > > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > >> > > Rockets mailing list >> > >> > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com >> > >> > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > >> > Rockets mailing list >> > >> > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com >> > >> > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> > >> Rockets mailing list >> > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com >> > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> > >> Rockets mailing list >> > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com >> > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Rockets mailing list >> > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com >> > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets >> > > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Rockets mailing list >> > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com >> > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From Mfreptiles at aol.com Sat Oct 10 14:15:48 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 17:15:48 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Message-ID: Correct. Metal is your friend for these types of flights. There are two camps out there. The ones who have seen extreme g flights and those that haven't. The ones that have are scared, and the ones that haven't wonder what the big deal is. Honestly, it is hard to wrap your head around, so I understand the skeptics. These forces crush batteries, rip components off of circuit boards. And they are fun to watch, even for the low and slow crowd. I like it because it is a challenge from both the motor design and the flight vehicle. And most flyers have never seen anything close to it. Fun stuff. Mike F. In a message dated 10/10/2009 12:22:42 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, winningstad at comcast.net writes: The motors are near or at when one needs a metal airframe & fins... From tomjerry1 at dishmail.net Sat Oct 10 14:27:00 2009 From: tomjerry1 at dishmail.net (Roy Jenkins) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:27:00 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted References: <29046108.1255204372505.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <39C05D95EB934F32B82BC1D928155BC3@roy4700> Greg Fanon (sp) and it was incredible Roy From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Sat Oct 10 15:17:16 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:17:16 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust References: Message-ID: I for one had the opportunity to be the LCO of the Fisher June 38mm L. Usually you get a visual chuf to know the motors lit. Not in this case. I believed the ignitor was toast.... And it left the pad. That was a Chiroprators dream come true. That neck snapping flight likely helped a few chiropractors to make boat payments the following week. It was a privilege to watch, experience and something I don't think I'll forget. To build a rocket to survive that is not something I could honestly say I could do without help and advise. I'd certainly wear out my welcome with Dennis, Brad, Adrian, Fred, Greg, Ray, Roy, Scott, Mike and so many others. My guess for ground testing could be like placing the rocket horizontal on a sawhorse. Then having a loaded log truck roar in at 120 mph and hit it in the aft, and survive. Solder the surface mount components back onto the electronics.. and test again. Seen one. A privilege to watch. Personally, no where close to creating something would survive. Happy little L2 sitting quiet in the dark closet. ;-) Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 2:15 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > Correct. Metal is your friend for these types of flights. > > There are two camps out there. The ones who have seen extreme g flights > and those that haven't. The ones that have are scared, and the ones that > haven't wonder what the big deal is. > > Honestly, it is hard to wrap your head around, so I understand the > skeptics. > > These forces crush batteries, rip components off of circuit boards. And > they are fun to watch, even for the low and slow crowd. I like it > because > it is a challenge from both the motor design and the flight vehicle. > > And most flyers have never seen anything close to it. Fun stuff. > > Mike F. > > > In a message dated 10/10/2009 12:22:42 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > winningstad at comcast.net writes: > > The motors are near or at when one needs a metal airframe & fins... > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From bwhitemarsh at comcast.net Sat Oct 10 15:30:53 2009 From: bwhitemarsh at comcast.net (Bryan Whitemarsh) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:30:53 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: <1827260580.4399591255197446988.JavaMail.root@sz0028a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <646F31C822DD448B824DFDACF364B80F@BryanDesktop> Chris: All I can say is, "Wow." I think there has been lots of advice and a fair amount of encouragement in response to your posts. No offense was intended in my previous post. I tried to carefully think it through before sending it because the last thing I want to do is douse people's ambitions. After re-reading my post, the only one I think could be offended by it is Bob (sorry if I called you out, Bob. No disrespect meant). In my "real life" I work as a physician. There is an old saying in the medical field that there are three types of doctors: Those who are unconfident and incompetent, those who are confident and competent, and those who are confident and incompetent. The first two groups are relatively safe to be around. The confident and incompetent group is who you have to look out for. Rocketry is much like that. After attending BALLS, I find myself in the unconfident and incompetent group. It remains to be seen where you will end up. As for your comment about people chipping in their two cents who are not part of the conversation, let me remind you that you are posting to a forum. Items posted to the forum are subject to peer review. I view you and I as very close peers. We are both relatively new to high power rocketry, we both have an ego (I certified level 1 on a dual deploy rocket with redundant electronics), and we both have been concerned about having ambitions doused by others (lots of people on this forum subscribe to the KISS principle). However, if you are not comfortable having your postings reviewed by your peers and are unable to take advice from anyone who says anything other than "do whatever you want," then I suggest you take everything off this forum and keep your "trade secrets" to yourself. That way, I won't need to groan with every posting about group Level 3 cert projects, recessing motors into tailcones, and certifying on commercial 54mm M motors. I won't post anything more about this issue as I certainly don't want to turn this into bashing or discouragement. There is certainly no disrespect or insult intended. By the way, your Level 2 rocket looks to have turned out really well. Respectfully, Bryan _____ From: Christopher Guenther [mailto:guentherchristopher at gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 12:12 PM To: bwhitemarsh at comcast.net; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Those of you out there that are attempting to Bash my idea are the reason so few people come to the hobby or even stay in for very long. You should be offering encouragement instead. Lucky for me the more I get told by people that are not a part of the conversation that I can't do it the more apt I am to do it! Most of this conversation was taken off list for that reason and to keep some thing secret from the rest(trade secrets, gotta keep em). So as for most of you who are also going to chip your 2 cents in as to why I or anyone else can't save it. You will just be fueling my ambitions and most likely dousing others. Maybe mix in some advice and encouragement with your criticism. What does anyone gain in experience if they do not attempt to try? On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:57 AM, wrote: Christopher: I got my level 2 cert this year at FITS. I went to BALLS this year as an observer to see how the "Big Boys" do it. I took away a couple of major learning points: (1) There is a huge difference between a Level 2 rocket and a Level 3 project. I observed at least 2 shredded Level 3 attempts at BALLS. It is apparent to me that a level three project is something more than just, "build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F's or Ray's motor." (2) There is a lot to be learned by watching more advanced fliers, asking questions, and observing their results. By my count, you are currently one for two in Level 1 flights. I have read your posted questions and it is apparent that you (like manyof us) still have a lot to learn about high power rocketry before "cramming a motor" in an L3 project. And that doesn't even take into account the massive increase in complexity of a ridiculous thrust, minimum-diameter project that has even the "Big Boys" wondering if it can be done. Ask Bob Yanacek about his last minimum-diameter project. Just my two cents, but I think there is a lot to be gained from stepping back, talking less, getting some L1 and L2 flights under your belt, and trying to glean as much as you can from those who have been there and done that before insulting Mike F and others with thoughts of cramming their motors in your L3 project. I know I'll be spending some serious time flying Level 2 before even thinking about stepping up. No offense intended. Bryan Whitemarsh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> To: "W. Raymond Stoner " Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com Sent: Friday, October 9, 2009 8:06:04 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust That is why I build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F. 's or Ray's motor. On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM, W. Raymond Stoner wrote: > You can't cert on a research motor. > Ray > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > On Behalf Of Robert Krausert > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:51 PM > To: Christopher Guenther ; Dennis S Winningstad > Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > Chris, > You want to get your L3 cert on a 54mm 72 inch motor that will exceed 100+ > g's and push mach 3 for several seconds? For me, I'd ask for a L3 sponsor > so > > I could fly. But I'd never use that for my L3. This motor will out perform > most military spec missiles. I'd keep away from it except for fun. As a > cert > > flight, scary. Save the L3 cert flight for something you have control over. > Mike's motor is more of a "just try to survive." > > Think of trying to build a uniform to survive an impact from a logging > truck > > approaching for a direct hit at 120 mph. I know I'd become a red splatter > on > > the road. Your rocket needs to go from zero to "oh my god!!" in about 0.3 > seconds. > > You might want to reconsider. That is all up to you. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> > To: "Dennis S Winningstad " < winningstad @comcast.net> > Cc: > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:36 PM > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > >I know I would have to be L3. I would use it to attempt a cert for L3. > > Since I built everything but the motor it would qualify would it not? I > > plan to be L2 somewhere mid Rocketober . If not then deffinently before > > next > > BALLS. That would be a great time to Cert L3. > > > > Chris Guenther > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Dennis S Winningstad < > > winningstad @comcast.net> wrote: > > > >> Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? Then what's the problem????????????? > >> > >> Dennis S Winningstad > >> 503-781-3529 > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > >> On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM > >> To: 'Christopher Guenther' ; Mfreptiles @ aol .com > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > >> > >> You need to be L3 to fly this motor. > >> > >> Ray > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > >> On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM > >> To: Mfreptiles @ aol .com > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > >> > >> You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I love > >> building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps my > >> hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did > when > >> the kids were born) > >> > >> Chris Guenther > >> > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> wrote: > >> > >> > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor is > >> 72" > >> > long. > >> > > >> > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a good > >> > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, this > >> > is > >> a > >> > BALLS flight. > >> > > >> > Mike F. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > >> > lawndart . robert @ gmail .com writes: > >> > > >> > Mike, > >> > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your > >> > 54mm > >> > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it > >> > during > >> > an > >> > EX day next year. > >> > > >> > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse parameters > >> > if > >> > you > >> > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. > >> > > >> > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. > >> > > >> > Cheers, > >> > Robert > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> > From: < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> > >> > To: < sutchek @ sbcglobal .net>; ; > >> > > >> > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM > >> > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > >> > > >> > > >> > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your > >> > intent, > >> > > but that's the way it reads. > >> > > > >> > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly > >> > > but > >> am > >> > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me know > >> > before > >> > > someone else speaks for it. > >> > > > >> > > Mike F. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > >> > > sutchek @ sbcglobal .net writes: > >> > > > >> > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > >> > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > Rockets mailing list > >> > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Rockets mailing list > >> > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > >> > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets@ rocketsnw .com http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Sat Oct 10 15:33:24 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:33:24 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <646F31C822DD448B824DFDACF364B80F@BryanDesktop> References: <1827260580.4399591255197446988.JavaMail.root@sz0028a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> <646F31C822DD448B824DFDACF364B80F@BryanDesktop> Message-ID: It wasn't so much that but the off list emails from certain people, they know who they are, that bashed me relentlessly. Those were not only mean but some were down right degrading. On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Bryan Whitemarsh wrote: > Chris: > All I can say is, "Wow." > > I think there has been lots of advice and a fair amount of encouragement in > response to your posts. No offense was intended in my previous post. I > tried to carefully think it through before sending it because the last > thing > I want to do is douse people's ambitions. After re-reading my post, the > only one I think could be offended by it is Bob (sorry if I called you out, > Bob. No disrespect meant). > > In my "real life" I work as a physician. There is an old saying in the > medical field that there are three types of doctors: Those who are > unconfident and incompetent, those who are confident and competent, and > those who are confident and incompetent. The first two groups are > relatively safe to be around. The confident and incompetent group is who > you have to look out for. Rocketry is much like that. After attending > BALLS, I find myself in the unconfident and incompetent group. It remains > to be seen where you will end up. > > As for your comment about people chipping in their two cents who are not > part of the conversation, let me remind you that you are posting to a > forum. > Items posted to the forum are subject to peer review. I view you and I as > very close peers. We are both relatively new to high power rocketry, we > both have an ego (I certified level 1 on a dual deploy rocket with > redundant > electronics), and we both have been concerned about having ambitions doused > by others (lots of people on this forum subscribe to the KISS principle). > However, if you are not comfortable having your postings reviewed by your > peers and are unable to take advice from anyone who says anything other > than > "do whatever you want," then I suggest you take everything off this forum > and keep your "trade secrets" to yourself. That way, I won't need to groan > with every posting about group Level 3 cert projects, recessing motors into > tailcones, and certifying on commercial 54mm M motors. > > I won't post anything more about this issue as I certainly don't want to > turn this into bashing or discouragement. There is certainly no disrespect > or insult intended. By the way, your Level 2 rocket looks to have turned > out really well. > > Respectfully, > Bryan > > > > _____ > > From: Christopher Guenther [mailto:guentherchristopher at gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 12:12 PM > To: bwhitemarsh at comcast.net; rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > Those of you out there that are attempting to Bash my idea are the reason > so > few people come to the hobby or even stay in for very long. You should be > offering encouragement instead. Lucky for me the more I get told by people > that are not a part of the conversation that I can't do it the more apt I > am > to do it! Most of this conversation was taken off list for that reason and > to keep some thing secret from the rest(trade secrets, gotta keep em). So > as for most of you who are also going to chip your 2 cents in as to why I > or > anyone else can't save it. You will just be fueling my ambitions and most > likely dousing others. Maybe mix in some advice and encouragement with > your > criticism. What does anyone gain in experience if they do not attempt to > try? > > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:57 AM, wrote: > > > > > Christopher: > > I got my level 2 cert this year at FITS. I went to BALLS this year as an > observer to see how the "Big Boys" do it. I took away a couple of major > learning points: (1) There is a huge difference between a Level 2 rocket > and a Level 3 project. I observed at least 2 shredded Level 3 attempts at > BALLS. It is apparent to me that a level three project is something more > than just, "build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F's or Ray's motor." > (2) There is a lot to be learned by watching more advanced fliers, asking > questions, and observing their results. By my count, you are currently one > for two in Level 1 flights. I have read your posted questions and it is > apparent that you (like manyof us) still have a lot to learn about high > power rocketry before "cramming a motor" in an L3 project. And that > doesn't > even take into account the massive increase in complexity of a ridiculous > thrust, minimum-diameter project that has even the "Big Boys" wondering if > it can be done. Ask Bob Yanacek about his last minimum-diameter project. > > Just my two cents, but I think there is a lot to be gained from stepping > back, talking less, getting some L1 and L2 flights under your belt, and > trying to glean as much as you can from those who have been there and done > that before insulting Mike F and others with thoughts of cramming their > motors in your L3 project. I know I'll be spending some serious time > flying > Level 2 before even thinking about stepping up. No offense intended. > > > > Bryan Whitemarsh > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> > > To: "W. Raymond Stoner " > Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > Sent: Friday, October 9, 2009 8:06:04 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > That is why I build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F. 's or Ray's > motor. > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM, W. Raymond Stoner > wrote: > > > You can't cert on a research motor. > > Ray > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com [ mailto :rockets-bounces at rocketsnw > .com] > > On Behalf Of Robert Krausert > > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:51 PM > > To: Christopher Guenther ; Dennis S Winningstad > > Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > > Chris, > > You want to get your L3 cert on a 54mm 72 inch motor that will exceed > 100+ > > g's and push mach 3 for several seconds? For me, I'd ask for a L3 sponsor > > so > > > > I could fly. But I'd never use that for my L3. This motor will out > perform > > most military spec missiles. I'd keep away from it except for fun. As a > > cert > > > > flight, scary. Save the L3 cert flight for something you have control > over. > > Mike's motor is more of a "just try to survive." > > > > Think of trying to build a uniform to survive an impact from a logging > > truck > > > > approaching for a direct hit at 120 mph. I know I'd become a red splatter > > on > > > > the road. Your rocket needs to go from zero to "oh my god!!" in about 0.3 > > seconds. > > > > You might want to reconsider. That is all up to you. > > > > Cheers, > > Robert > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> > > To: "Dennis S Winningstad " < winningstad @comcast.net> > > Cc: > > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:36 PM > > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > > > > >I know I would have to be L3. I would use it to attempt a cert for L3. > > > Since I built everything but the motor it would qualify would it not? > I > > > plan to be L2 somewhere mid Rocketober . If not then deffinently > before > > > next > > > BALLS. That would be a great time to Cert L3. > > > > > > Chris Guenther > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Dennis S Winningstad < > > > winningstad @comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > >> Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? Then what's the problem????????????? > > >> > > >> Dennis S Winningstad > > >> 503-781-3529 > > >> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com > > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > > >> On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner > > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM > > >> To: 'Christopher Guenther' ; Mfreptiles @ aol .com > > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > >> > > >> You need to be L3 to fly this motor. > > >> > > >> Ray > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com > > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > > >> On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM > > >> To: Mfreptiles @ aol .com > > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > >> > > >> You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I > love > > >> building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps > my > > >> hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did > > when > > >> the kids were born) > > >> > > >> Chris Guenther > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> wrote: > > >> > > >> > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor > is > > >> 72" > > >> > long. > > >> > > > >> > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a > good > > >> > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, > this > > >> > is > > >> a > > >> > BALLS flight. > > >> > > > >> > Mike F. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > >> > lawndart . robert @ gmail .com writes: > > >> > > > >> > Mike, > > >> > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your > > >> > 54mm > > >> > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it > > >> > during > > >> > an > > >> > EX day next year. > > >> > > > >> > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse > parameters > > >> > if > > >> > you > > >> > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. > > >> > > > >> > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. > > >> > > > >> > Cheers, > > >> > Robert > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > > >> > From: < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> > > >> > To: < sutchek @ sbcglobal .net>; ; > > >> > > > >> > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM > > >> > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your > > >> > intent, > > >> > > but that's the way it reads. > > >> > > > > >> > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly > > >> > > but > > >> am > > >> > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me > know > > >> > before > > >> > > someone else speaks for it. > > >> > > > > >> > > Mike F. > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > >> > > sutchek @ sbcglobal .net writes: > > >> > > > > >> > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > > >> > > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > Rockets mailing list > > >> > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > >> > Rockets mailing list > > >> > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > > >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Rockets mailing list > > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Rockets mailing list > > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Rockets mailing list > > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From winningstad at comcast.net Sat Oct 10 15:34:34 2009 From: winningstad at comcast.net (Dennis S Winningstad) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:34:34 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0cd201ca49f9$d79f5bf0$86de13d0$@net> To watch a 'Fisher Flight' go up on the hill 1/2 mile away! Dennis S Winningstad 503-781-3529 -----Original Message----- From: Robert Krausert [mailto:lawndart.robert at gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:17 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; winningstad at comcast.net; Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust I for one had the opportunity to be the LCO of the Fisher June 38mm L. Usually you get a visual chuf to know the motors lit. Not in this case. I believed the ignitor was toast.... And it left the pad. That was a Chiroprators dream come true. That neck snapping flight likely helped a few chiropractors to make boat payments the following week. It was a privilege to watch, experience and something I don't think I'll forget. To build a rocket to survive that is not something I could honestly say I could do without help and advise. I'd certainly wear out my welcome with Dennis, Brad, Adrian, Fred, Greg, Ray, Roy, Scott, Mike and so many others. My guess for ground testing could be like placing the rocket horizontal on a sawhorse. Then having a loaded log truck roar in at 120 mph and hit it in the aft, and survive. Solder the surface mount components back onto the electronics.. and test again. Seen one. A privilege to watch. Personally, no where close to creating something would survive. Happy little L2 sitting quiet in the dark closet. ;-) Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 2:15 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > Correct. Metal is your friend for these types of flights. > > There are two camps out there. The ones who have seen extreme g flights > and those that haven't. The ones that have are scared, and the ones that > haven't wonder what the big deal is. > > Honestly, it is hard to wrap your head around, so I understand the > skeptics. > > These forces crush batteries, rip components off of circuit boards. And > they are fun to watch, even for the low and slow crowd. I like it > because > it is a challenge from both the motor design and the flight vehicle. > > And most flyers have never seen anything close to it. Fun stuff. > > Mike F. > > > In a message dated 10/10/2009 12:22:42 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > winningstad at comcast.net writes: > > The motors are near or at when one needs a metal airframe & fins... > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Sat Oct 10 15:36:08 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:36:08 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket Launch Event October 16th - 18th 2009 Message-ID: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert> We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. Weather forecast is: Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank you sir. Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast out there for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive changes in rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Krausert To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket Launch Event October 16th - 18th 2009 OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to announce our Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th through 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join us for a very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific Northwest. You are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry begins with OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for OregonRocketry. We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are one. This launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining flights. October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are welcome to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with TRA research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are allowed to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, and invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the prep area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets on Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor days. Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do not need to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, and spend some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday and 8:00am to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need something on your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in the dark. But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those glow sticks taped to rockets can work. The onsite FSO will need to make sure everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before committing. They may have ideas. This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have some ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During the day and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or treat you to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep them at bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a long day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the center one, located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. Also, consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like devices at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the community fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's up to them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety code. As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit the OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and TRA websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to comprehend and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be reviewed by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If you are bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about stability, center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and complex rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the public. We certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of fun. We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA clearance to 25,000 feet above sea level (or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules are 75% of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or 15,375 feet AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high enough to keep everyone happy. Directions: We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers launch site. At this web URL, there are two directions. http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create any more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. The firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have a fire Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk and good times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some firewood. We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally get to watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us have been out there till 3am and later. New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch site, and has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to be prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, sunburns can happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And sun-screen, sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site to learn more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we expect to have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to the site. http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running of the event. Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare you and your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or hot, water is so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group healthy. Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to have one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day and that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at 9:30am Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th through 18th. Cheers, Robert OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER From vern_knowles at att.net Sat Oct 10 16:32:06 2009 From: vern_knowles at att.net (Vern Knowles) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 17:32:06 -0600 Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted In-Reply-To: <29046108.1255204372505.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <29046108.1255204372505.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <000c01ca4a01$e1dd4d40$0400a8c0@MainPC> The video of Greg Fannin's Orange Crush "loop" is posted here: http://www.vernk.com/OrangeCrush.htm (We all figured Greg was just showing off.) Vern Knowles > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com > [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of > steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 1:53 PM > To: Robert Krausert; Scott T Bowers; 'Kent Newman'; Mfreptiles at aol.com > Cc: 'Rockets NW list' > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > > I think Orange Crush was a rocket flown by a fellow in the > Idaho club and if memory serves correctly it was at an XPRS > event. I was with Alex and we couldn't believe our eyes, but > now thinking about the trap others have fallen into... > Over-stability and optimum performance are seemingly mutually > exclusive making this topic more than just trivial. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Robert Krausert > >Sent: Oct 10, 2009 12:21 PM > >To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com, Scott T Bowers > , 'Kent Newman' > , Mfreptiles at aol.com > >Cc: 'Rockets NW list' > >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > > > >I remember once having a copy of a video of a rocket that > did a 360 and > >contiued on its journey. I'm trying remember the name. Might > be a loss of > >brain cells, but what came to mind is "Orange Crush." > > > >From what I can recall - it was maybe 1000 feet up, spun, > and then went on > >its way. > > > >Cheers, > >Robert > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: > >To: "Scott T Bowers" ; "'Kent Newman'" > >; > >Cc: "'Rockets NW list'" > >Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 12:07 PM > >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > > > > > >>I remember that flight - too unreal, but it happened - just > like one would > >>expect to see in a cartoon. /Steve > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >>>From: Scott T Bowers > >>>Sent: Oct 10, 2009 7:52 AM > >>>To: 'Kent Newman' , Mfreptiles at aol.com > >>>Cc: 'Rockets NW list' > >>>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > >>> > >>>Wilkerson and I found that out the hard way at brothers a > few years ago, > >>>looped a 75mm M zinc motor right over the flight > line....burned off enough > >>>to go stable and went near straight up to over 9K. 9K with > a loop, pretty > >>>good motor.... > >>> > >>> > >>>Scott T. Bowers > >>>www.scottsrockets.com > >>> > >>> > >>>-----Original Message----- > >>>From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com > [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > >>>On Behalf Of Kent Newman > >>>Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 2:53 AM > >>>To: Mfreptiles at aol.com > >>>Cc: Rockets NW list > >>>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > >>> > >>>No change on the mix from the first flight, Mike. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>Zn without checking? That could have a bit of an impact J > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>K > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] > >>>Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:13 PM > >>>To: kent.newman at comcast.net; jhadv at pacifier.com; > rockets at rocketsnw.com > >>>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>Too much metal in the propellant. :) I did that once. > Flew fine on no > >>>metals load, then loaded up a high zinc and didn't check > CP/CG. Loopy. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>Mike F. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>In a message dated 10/9/2009 7:07:26 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > >>>kent.newman at comcast.net writes: > >>> > >>>Or something close to that explanation :-) > >>> > >>>_______________________________________________ > >>>Rockets mailing list > >>>Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >>>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >>> > >>> > >>>_______________________________________________ > >>>Rockets mailing list > >>>Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >>>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From sb at berfield.com Sat Oct 10 18:38:47 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 01:38:47 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted Message-ID: That was one of the first high power launches I ever saw. I think I asked how they made it fo the loop. -----Original Message----- From: Vern Knowles [mailto:vern_knowles at att.net] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 04:32 PM To: ''Rockets NW list'' Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted The video of Greg Fannin's Orange Crush "loop" is posted here: http://www.vernk.com/OrangeCrush.htm (We all figured Greg was just showing off.) Vern Knowles > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com > [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of > steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 1:53 PM > To: Robert Krausert; Scott T Bowers; 'Kent Newman'; Mfreptiles at aol.com > Cc: 'Rockets NW list' > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > > I think Orange Crush was a rocket flown by a fellow in the > Idaho club and if memory serves correctly it was at an XPRS > event. I was with Alex and we couldn't believe our eyes, but > now thinking about the trap others have fallen into... > Over-stability and optimum performance are seemingly mutually > exclusive making this topic more than just trivial. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Robert Krausert > >Sent: Oct 10, 2009 12:21 PM > >To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com, Scott T Bowers > , 'Kent Newman' > , Mfreptiles at aol.com > >Cc: 'Rockets NW list' > >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > > > >I remember once having a copy of a video of a rocket that > did a 360 and > >contiued on its journey. I'm trying remember the name. Might > be a loss of > >brain cells, but what came to mind is "Orange Crush." > > > >From what I can recall - it was maybe 1000 feet up, spun, > and then went on > >its way. > > > >Cheers, > >Robert > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: > >To: "Scott T Bowers" ; "'Kent Newman'" > >; > >Cc: "'Rockets NW list'" > >Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 12:07 PM > >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > > > > > >>I remember that flight - too unreal, but it happened - just > like one would > >>expect to see in a cartoon. /Steve > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >>>From: Scott T Bowers > >>>Sent: Oct 10, 2009 7:52 AM > >>>To: 'Kent Newman' , Mfreptiles at aol.com > >>>Cc: 'Rockets NW list' > >>>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > >>> > >>>Wilkerson and I found that out the hard way at brothers a > few years ago, > >>>looped a 75mm M zinc motor right over the flight > line....burned off enough > >>>to go stable and went near straight up to over 9K. 9K with > a loop, pretty > >>>good motor.... > >>> > >>> > >>>Scott T. Bowers > >>>www.scottsrockets.com > >>> > >>> > >>>-----Original Message----- > >>>From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com > [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > >>>On Behalf Of Kent Newman > >>>Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 2:53 AM > >>>To: Mfreptiles at aol.com > >>>Cc: Rockets NW list > >>>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > >>> > >>>No change on the mix from the first flight, Mike. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>Zn without checking? That could have a bit of an impact J > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>K > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] > >>>Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:13 PM > >>>To: kent.newman at comcast.net; jhadv at pacifier.com; > rockets at rocketsnw.com > >>>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] HardTail Video Posted > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>Too much metal in the propellant. :) I did that once. > Flew fine on no > >>>metals load, then loaded up a high zinc and didn't check > CP/CG. Loopy. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>Mike F. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>In a message dated 10/9/2009 7:07:26 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > >>>kent.newman at comcast.net writes: > >>> > >>>Or something close to that explanation :-) > >>> > >>>_______________________________________________ > >>>Rockets mailing list > >>>Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >>>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >>> > >>> > >>>_______________________________________________ > >>>Rockets mailing list > >>>Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >>>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From absworld at cet.com Sat Oct 10 18:47:18 2009 From: absworld at cet.com (Bob & Ann Yanecek) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 18:47:18 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: <1827260580.4399591255197446988.JavaMail.root@sz0028a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> <646F31C822DD448B824DFDACF364B80F@BryanDesktop> Message-ID: <00e901ca4a14$c5b5d570$51218050$@com> Level 1 talking Level 3 while prepping for Level 2. It does have the tendency to raise an eyebrow or three. Thanks to 'certain people' for sparing me :-) Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:33 PM To: Bryan Whitemarsh Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust It wasn't so much that but the off list emails from certain people, they know who they are, that bashed me relentlessly. Those were not only mean but some were down right degrading. On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Bryan Whitemarsh wrote: > Chris: > All I can say is, "Wow." > > I think there has been lots of advice and a fair amount of encouragement in > response to your posts. No offense was intended in my previous post. I > tried to carefully think it through before sending it because the last > thing > I want to do is douse people's ambitions. After re-reading my post, the > only one I think could be offended by it is Bob (sorry if I called you out, > Bob. No disrespect meant). > > In my "real life" I work as a physician. There is an old saying in the > medical field that there are three types of doctors: Those who are > unconfident and incompetent, those who are confident and competent, and > those who are confident and incompetent. The first two groups are > relatively safe to be around. The confident and incompetent group is who > you have to look out for. Rocketry is much like that. After attending > BALLS, I find myself in the unconfident and incompetent group. It remains > to be seen where you will end up. > > As for your comment about people chipping in their two cents who are not > part of the conversation, let me remind you that you are posting to a > forum. > Items posted to the forum are subject to peer review. I view you and I as > very close peers. We are both relatively new to high power rocketry, we > both have an ego (I certified level 1 on a dual deploy rocket with > redundant > electronics), and we both have been concerned about having ambitions doused > by others (lots of people on this forum subscribe to the KISS principle). > However, if you are not comfortable having your postings reviewed by your > peers and are unable to take advice from anyone who says anything other > than > "do whatever you want," then I suggest you take everything off this forum > and keep your "trade secrets" to yourself. That way, I won't need to groan > with every posting about group Level 3 cert projects, recessing motors into > tailcones, and certifying on commercial 54mm M motors. > > I won't post anything more about this issue as I certainly don't want to > turn this into bashing or discouragement. There is certainly no disrespect > or insult intended. By the way, your Level 2 rocket looks to have turned > out really well. > > Respectfully, > Bryan > > > > _____ > > From: Christopher Guenther [mailto:guentherchristopher at gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 12:12 PM > To: bwhitemarsh at comcast.net; rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > Those of you out there that are attempting to Bash my idea are the reason > so > few people come to the hobby or even stay in for very long. You should be > offering encouragement instead. Lucky for me the more I get told by people > that are not a part of the conversation that I can't do it the more apt I > am > to do it! Most of this conversation was taken off list for that reason and > to keep some thing secret from the rest(trade secrets, gotta keep em). So > as for most of you who are also going to chip your 2 cents in as to why I > or > anyone else can't save it. You will just be fueling my ambitions and most > likely dousing others. Maybe mix in some advice and encouragement with > your > criticism. What does anyone gain in experience if they do not attempt to > try? > > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:57 AM, wrote: > > > > > Christopher: > > I got my level 2 cert this year at FITS. I went to BALLS this year as an > observer to see how the "Big Boys" do it. I took away a couple of major > learning points: (1) There is a huge difference between a Level 2 rocket > and a Level 3 project. I observed at least 2 shredded Level 3 attempts at > BALLS. It is apparent to me that a level three project is something more > than just, "build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F's or Ray's motor." > (2) There is a lot to be learned by watching more advanced fliers, asking > questions, and observing their results. By my count, you are currently one > for two in Level 1 flights. I have read your posted questions and it is > apparent that you (like manyof us) still have a lot to learn about high > power rocketry before "cramming a motor" in an L3 project. And that > doesn't > even take into account the massive increase in complexity of a ridiculous > thrust, minimum-diameter project that has even the "Big Boys" wondering if > it can be done. Ask Bob Yanacek about his last minimum-diameter project. > > Just my two cents, but I think there is a lot to be gained from stepping > back, talking less, getting some L1 and L2 flights under your belt, and > trying to glean as much as you can from those who have been there and done > that before insulting Mike F and others with thoughts of cramming their > motors in your L3 project. I know I'll be spending some serious time > flying > Level 2 before even thinking about stepping up. No offense intended. > > > > Bryan Whitemarsh > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> > > To: "W. Raymond Stoner " > Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > Sent: Friday, October 9, 2009 8:06:04 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > That is why I build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F. 's or Ray's > motor. > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM, W. Raymond Stoner > wrote: > > > You can't cert on a research motor. > > Ray > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com [ mailto :rockets-bounces at rocketsnw > .com] > > On Behalf Of Robert Krausert > > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:51 PM > > To: Christopher Guenther ; Dennis S Winningstad > > Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > > Chris, > > You want to get your L3 cert on a 54mm 72 inch motor that will exceed > 100+ > > g's and push mach 3 for several seconds? For me, I'd ask for a L3 sponsor > > so > > > > I could fly. But I'd never use that for my L3. This motor will out > perform > > most military spec missiles. I'd keep away from it except for fun. As a > > cert > > > > flight, scary. Save the L3 cert flight for something you have control > over. > > Mike's motor is more of a "just try to survive." > > > > Think of trying to build a uniform to survive an impact from a logging > > truck > > > > approaching for a direct hit at 120 mph. I know I'd become a red splatter > > on > > > > the road. Your rocket needs to go from zero to "oh my god!!" in about 0.3 > > seconds. > > > > You might want to reconsider. That is all up to you. > > > > Cheers, > > Robert > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> > > To: "Dennis S Winningstad " < winningstad @comcast.net> > > Cc: > > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:36 PM > > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > > > > >I know I would have to be L3. I would use it to attempt a cert for L3. > > > Since I built everything but the motor it would qualify would it not? > I > > > plan to be L2 somewhere mid Rocketober . If not then deffinently > before > > > next > > > BALLS. That would be a great time to Cert L3. > > > > > > Chris Guenther > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Dennis S Winningstad < > > > winningstad @comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > >> Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? Then what's the problem????????????? > > >> > > >> Dennis S Winningstad > > >> 503-781-3529 > > >> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com > > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > > >> On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner > > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM > > >> To: 'Christopher Guenther' ; Mfreptiles @ aol .com > > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > >> > > >> You need to be L3 to fly this motor. > > >> > > >> Ray > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com > > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > > >> On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM > > >> To: Mfreptiles @ aol .com > > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > >> > > >> You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I > love > > >> building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps > my > > >> hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did > > when > > >> the kids were born) > > >> > > >> Chris Guenther > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> wrote: > > >> > > >> > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor > is > > >> 72" > > >> > long. > > >> > > > >> > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a > good > > >> > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, > this > > >> > is > > >> a > > >> > BALLS flight. > > >> > > > >> > Mike F. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > >> > lawndart . robert @ gmail .com writes: > > >> > > > >> > Mike, > > >> > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your > > >> > 54mm > > >> > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it > > >> > during > > >> > an > > >> > EX day next year. > > >> > > > >> > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse > parameters > > >> > if > > >> > you > > >> > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. > > >> > > > >> > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. > > >> > > > >> > Cheers, > > >> > Robert > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > > >> > From: < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> > > >> > To: < sutchek @ sbcglobal .net>; ; > > >> > > > >> > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM > > >> > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your > > >> > intent, > > >> > > but that's the way it reads. > > >> > > > > >> > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly > > >> > > but > > >> am > > >> > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me > know > > >> > before > > >> > > someone else speaks for it. > > >> > > > > >> > > Mike F. > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > >> > > sutchek @ sbcglobal .net writes: > > >> > > > > >> > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > > >> > > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > Rockets mailing list > > >> > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > >> > Rockets mailing list > > >> > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > > >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Rockets mailing list > > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Rockets mailing list > > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Rockets mailing list > > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Sat Oct 10 19:46:38 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (Steve Cutonilli) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 19:46:38 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <000601ca48fd$744316c0$5cc94440$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: <804671011BF84DB6B518806B155CE689@steve> I didn't look at the raw data as Bob did, but extracted from the ARTS2 graphical recording. My booster tube let go just under 6K AGL - the rocket was traveling at nearly 2500 ft/sec, so MaxQBaby indeed. Wish I had a video to understand the booster's continued stable trajectory then flat spin for recovery - that's what you want it to do - call me lucky on that. For precisely as Fred stated - the transonic dwell time should be factored but it becomes more of a concern on a staged project than a minimum diameter one as originally shrugged for virtually any motor you choose to fly - EX rule of thumb established. Starsky-n-Hutch is a very good example for general study - the complement to how Rob and I flew the 50k project a couple years back - S&H when first flown successfully it staged supersonic, right Kent? I already know what I'm going to fly for BALLS19 - a no brainer for step improvement w/o the class-3 burden - the real design hurdle becomes motor-class optimization to stay below the C3 threshold, but still fly on the edge. Begs the questions... How does one even deal with staging sequence inhibiting mechanisms that I've heard about on this list if there isn't a standard for implementation? Is it a TRA requirement or simply a means to gain FAA class-3 acceptance from the resulting gains in dispersion results? /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:28 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Max Q, baby! Usually does the trick. K -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek [mailto:absworld at cet.com] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:00 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... AV bay appears to have survived intact (again). Downloaded data reveals the following: PF Hi-Alt 45 reported 7,140'. ARTS-2 data: Max velocity = 2386 fps Max Baro altitude = 11,480' Shred occurred at 6.5 seconds. Expected motor burn was 6.6 seconds (I almost made it ;-) Motor was expected to be progressive but ARTS plot shows regressive. Motor was expected to be an M1110, ARTS reported M942. Expected peak thrust = 1293N at 4 seconds, ARTS reported 1350N at 1.1 seconds. Not sure what fps value to use for MACH but I hit 1000 fps at 2.9 seconds, 1500 fps at 4.2 sec, 2000 fps at 5.4 sec. Doesn't sound like I hung out at any velocity but instead accelerated steadily till shredding. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:32 AM To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? K -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." Bob, This was your problem..... Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as fast as possible. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From andrewm at hawkfeather.com Sat Oct 10 19:58:11 2009 From: andrewm at hawkfeather.com (Andrew MacMillen) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 19:58:11 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: <00e901ca4a14$c5b5d570$51218050$@com> References: <1827260580.4399591255197446988.JavaMail.root@sz0028a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> <646F31C822DD448B824DFDACF364B80F@BryanDesktop> <00e901ca4a14$c5b5d570$51218050$@com> Message-ID: <4AD149C3.7020804@hawkfeather.com> Mike's motors are probably the mythical Level 4. Hey, maybe that's what it should be instead of beyond the M/N/O impulse. Not a Ns limit, but a Ns^2 limit - Newton seconds *per* second. So Mike's M in .5 seconds is sorta maybe equivalent to a P in 4-8 seconds... Andrwe. Bob & Ann Yanecek wrote: > Level 1 talking Level 3 while prepping for Level 2. > > It does have the tendency to raise an eyebrow or three. > > Thanks to 'certain people' for sparing me :-) > > Bob Yanecek [very long snippage] From t.j.doll at att.net Sat Oct 10 20:08:27 2009 From: t.j.doll at att.net (t.j.doll at att.net) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 03:08:27 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Set Altitude - what rocket to use? Message-ID: <101120090308.21766.4AD14C2B0003EBEA0000550622230647029B0A02D29B9B0EBF0404010BD206D29B@att.net> As I'm planning to attend NARAM 52 next summer in Pueblo, Colorado, I've been looking at the competition events. Unlike my pre-BAR rocketry in the 1970s (I did quite well in flying competition back then), I'm really not into competition rocketry anymore. But, as the saying goes, when in Rome, do as the Romans. I also still have a strong competitive streak - I also road race 100+ mph 'go-karts', and anything less than first place is a loss - so if I'm going to enter the flight competition, I want to do it right. NARAM 52 has an interesting 'set altitude' event - basically you want to obtain an altitude equal to the top of Pike's Peak (14, 110 ft), from a launch altitude of 5,400+ feet. So I've been thinking what would I want for a rocket that could obtain ~8,500 ft. AGL, after being launched from roughly a mile above sea level. I did really well in predicted and set altitude events four decades ago using a KISS system. Use a simple, relatively large (easy to track), high reliablity rocket. I'd like to do the same for this, but being relatively new to high power I'm somewhat at a loss at what to use. I'm looking for simple, reliable, quick and easy to build kit that can reach ~8500 ft. AGL - preferably on a Level 1 motor (although I do have Level 2 cert if necessary). Keeping the cost reasonable is also a consideration. Suggestions? TIA Tim From tnetcenter at gmail.com Sat Oct 10 20:25:15 2009 From: tnetcenter at gmail.com (Jeff Moore) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 20:25:15 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Set Altitude - what rocket to use? References: <101120090308.21766.4AD14C2B0003EBEA0000550622230647029B0A02D29B9B0EBF0404010BD206D29B@att.net> Message-ID: <7518C2E092B34A80A54E7F30CD2B7930@TNTCENTER> The PML Callisto sims to 8000 + AGL on a Cesaroni J285. That's at Brothers (4500 Ft MSL). That or the slightly shorter IO with the same motor should be able to get pretty close to the designated altitude. YMMV :-) Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: [RocketsNW] Set Altitude - what rocket to use? As I'm planning to attend NARAM 52 next summer in Pueblo, Colorado, I've been looking at the competition events. Unlike my pre-BAR rocketry in the 1970s (I did quite well in flying competition back then), I'm really not into competition rocketry anymore. But, as the saying goes, when in Rome, do as the Romans. I also still have a strong competitive streak - I also road race 100+ mph 'go-karts', and anything less than first place is a loss - so if I'm going to enter the flight competition, I want to do it right. NARAM 52 has an interesting 'set altitude' event - basically you want to obtain an altitude equal to the top of Pike's Peak (14, 110 ft), from a launch altitude of 5,400+ feet. So I've been thinking what would I want for a rocket that could obtain ~8,500 ft. AGL, after being launched from roughly a mile above sea level. I did really well in predicted and set altitude events four decades ago using a KISS system. Use a simple, relatively large (easy to track), high reliablity rocket. I'd like to do the same for this, but being relatively new to high power I'm somewhat at a loss at what to use. I'm looking for simple, reliable, quick and easy to build kit that can reach ~8500 ft. AGL - preferably on a Level 1 motor (although I do have Level 2 cert if necessary). Keeping the cost reasonable is also a consideration. Suggestions? TIA Tim _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From t.j.doll at att.net Sat Oct 10 20:32:29 2009 From: t.j.doll at att.net (t.j.doll at att.net) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 03:32:29 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] LEUP for Black Powder ejection charges? Message-ID: <101120090332.7058.4AD151CD000BC3C500001B9222230647029B0A02D29B9B0EBF0404010BD206D29B@att.net> OK, I understand we won the lawsuit with the BATF. But do I correctly understand that there is still a LEUP required for the small amounts of black powder we need for things like electronic dual deploy ejection charges? Or even obtaining (and keeping/storing) BP ejection charges for the larger L2 motors that don't come with ejection charges? This didn't seem to be an issue at LDRS - perhaps due to the 'crowd' that was in attendance, but I wasn't even asked for anything when I bought my L2 cert motor, and the BP ejection charge for my L2 cert flight was a 'gift' from the guy parked next to me. But what about future launches? I'm want to start messing around with electronic ejection - do I still need an LEUP buddy for the ejection charges? Thanks Tim Doll NAR 18340 Level 2 WooHoo! From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Sat Oct 10 20:41:52 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (Steve Cutonilli) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 20:41:52 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Set Altitude - what rocket to use? In-Reply-To: <7518C2E092B34A80A54E7F30CD2B7930@TNTCENTER> Message-ID: Good recommendation by Jeff. My vote is for a Binder Design Excel w/ 54mm MMT. Neat objectives by the OP. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Moore Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 8:25 PM To: Rocket Lost Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Set Altitude - what rocket to use? The PML Callisto sims to 8000 + AGL on a Cesaroni J285. That's at Brothers (4500 Ft MSL). That or the slightly shorter IO with the same motor should be able to get pretty close to the designated altitude. YMMV :-) Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: [RocketsNW] Set Altitude - what rocket to use? As I'm planning to attend NARAM 52 next summer in Pueblo, Colorado, I've been looking at the competition events. Unlike my pre-BAR rocketry in the 1970s (I did quite well in flying competition back then), I'm really not into competition rocketry anymore. But, as the saying goes, when in Rome, do as the Romans. I also still have a strong competitive streak - I also road race 100+ mph 'go-karts', and anything less than first place is a loss - so if I'm going to enter the flight competition, I want to do it right. NARAM 52 has an interesting 'set altitude' event - basically you want to obtain an altitude equal to the top of Pike's Peak (14, 110 ft), from a launch altitude of 5,400+ feet. So I've been thinking what would I want for a rocket that could obtain ~8,500 ft. AGL, after being launched from roughly a mile above sea level. I did really well in predicted and set altitude events four decades ago using a KISS system. Use a simple, relatively large (easy to track), high reliablity rocket. I'd like to do the same for this, but being relatively new to high power I'm somewhat at a loss at what to use. I'm looking for simple, reliable, quick and easy to build kit that can reach ~8500 ft. AGL - preferably on a Level 1 motor (although I do have Level 2 cert if necessary). Keeping the cost reasonable is also a consideration. Suggestions? TIA Tim _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Sat Oct 10 20:50:32 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (Steve Cutonilli) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 20:50:32 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] LEUP for Black Powder ejection charges? In-Reply-To: <101120090332.7058.4AD151CD000BC3C500001B9222230647029B0A02D29B9B0EBF0404010BD206D29B@att.net> Message-ID: <7C975DC6FC704D61934ABB31BDB5D78F@steve> Nope. Just don't make a fuss about it particularly on public forums. It is generally accepted that "some" BP will be used in rocketry along with single igniters - such an attitude dove-tales nicely with existing regulatory enforcement practices. For bulk storage, yeah get a LEUP. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of t.j.doll at att.net Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 8:32 PM To: Rocket Lost Subject: [RocketsNW] LEUP for Black Powder ejection charges? OK, I understand we won the lawsuit with the BATF. But do I correctly understand that there is still a LEUP required for the small amounts of black powder we need for things like electronic dual deploy ejection charges? Or even obtaining (and keeping/storing) BP ejection charges for the larger L2 motors that don't come with ejection charges? This didn't seem to be an issue at LDRS - perhaps due to the 'crowd' that was in attendance, but I wasn't even asked for anything when I bought my L2 cert motor, and the BP ejection charge for my L2 cert flight was a 'gift' from the guy parked next to me. But what about future launches? I'm want to start messing around with electronic ejection - do I still need an LEUP buddy for the ejection charges? Thanks Tim Doll NAR 18340 Level 2 WooHoo! _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Mfreptiles at aol.com Sat Oct 10 20:54:10 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 23:54:10 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: Mach 2.3 on OS. Impressive. Mike F. In a message dated 10/10/2009 7:47:08 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes: My booster tube let go just under 6K AGL - the rocket was traveling at nearly 2500 ft/sec, so MaxQBaby indeed. From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Sat Oct 10 20:56:30 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 20:56:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8a093fa5554a18e5ea0dd7517baf27fb.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> I used to have this mental image of pre-flight testing electronics for rockets with "five minutes in a paint shaker," the old kind that violently shook the can. Sounds like testing components and assemblies for these ultra-high G flights should consist of throwing them at a major league home run hitter--whack 'em right out of the ball park--and then pounding them on concrete with a claw hammer. Ought to be just about right! What newbies often overlook is that it's not just the peak G force, it's the sustained combination of that with a broad spectrum of vibrations. "Sustained" here meaning some short fraction of a second. :) I was once one of those who found it hard to believe that a rocket could crush batteries without even crashing. But I've seen it. +McG+ > Correct. Metal is your friend for these types of flights. > > There are two camps out there. The ones who have seen extreme g flights > and those that haven't. The ones that have are scared, and the ones that > haven't wonder what the big deal is. > > Honestly, it is hard to wrap your head around, so I understand the > skeptics. > > These forces crush batteries, rip components off of circuit boards. And > they are fun to watch, even for the low and slow crowd. I like it > because > it is a challenge from both the motor design and the flight vehicle. > > And most flyers have never seen anything close to it. Fun stuff. > > Mike F. > > > In a message dated 10/10/2009 12:22:42 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > winningstad at comcast.net writes: > > The motors are near or at when one needs a metal airframe & fins... > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Sat Oct 10 21:15:01 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (Steve Cutonilli) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 21:15:01 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <035DD027E6AA47E69C8B614C239393CB@steve> I think it would have bumped Mach 3 had the altimeter in the upper tube not detached - it was only half way in the burn. Like I said earlier - Rick Clapp has a good picture and either I was drunk or me eyes counted a half-dozen mach diamonds in the teaser review provided. Works particularly good when the solids loading is maintained high as you suggested and my Hobart mixer hates you. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Mfreptiles at aol.com Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 8:54 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Mach 2.3 on OS. Impressive. Mike F. In a message dated 10/10/2009 7:47:08 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes: My booster tube let go just under 6K AGL - the rocket was traveling at nearly 2500 ft/sec, so MaxQBaby indeed. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From kent.newman at comcast.net Sat Oct 10 22:40:31 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 22:40:31 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <804671011BF84DB6B518806B155CE689@steve> References: <000601ca48fd$744316c0$5cc94440$@newman@comcast.net> <804671011BF84DB6B518806B155CE689@steve> Message-ID: <000801ca4a35$5954c410$0bfe4c30$@newman@comcast.net> That's right, Steve. The one thing that we wanted to do with Starsky and Hutch was to stage anywhere but in the transonic range. Two years ago, we kept it at about Mach 1.5; this year we were going to drop to about Mach .6. The "permissive staging" issue is merely a means to limit what can be extreme variation in a dispersion plot when the sustainer of a two-stage is subject to so many variables at sustainer ignition. It is not a requirement of either TRA or the AST but certainly helps "sell" a project with potential chaos in its trajectory. Some of the simulations that we ran resulted in flight cylinders of up to 35 miles. Even at Black Rock, that is easily an issue with trains, towns, property, etc. Personally, I'm not so sure that Class 3 fliers alone should consider such safety features. Many on this list have likely seen two-stage flights that give us cause to exercise body orifices involuntarily. Permissive staging electronics, designed properly and economically viable, would be a welcome addition to the hobby. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:47 PM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... I didn't look at the raw data as Bob did, but extracted from the ARTS2 graphical recording. My booster tube let go just under 6K AGL - the rocket was traveling at nearly 2500 ft/sec, so MaxQBaby indeed. Wish I had a video to understand the booster's continued stable trajectory then flat spin for recovery - that's what you want it to do - call me lucky on that. For precisely as Fred stated - the transonic dwell time should be factored but it becomes more of a concern on a staged project than a minimum diameter one as originally shrugged for virtually any motor you choose to fly - EX rule of thumb established. Starsky-n-Hutch is a very good example for general study - the complement to how Rob and I flew the 50k project a couple years back - S&H when first flown successfully it staged supersonic, right Kent? I already know what I'm going to fly for BALLS19 - a no brainer for step improvement w/o the class-3 burden - the real design hurdle becomes motor-class optimization to stay below the C3 threshold, but still fly on the edge. Begs the questions... How does one even deal with staging sequence inhibiting mechanisms that I've heard about on this list if there isn't a standard for implementation? Is it a TRA requirement or simply a means to gain FAA class-3 acceptance from the resulting gains in dispersion results? /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:28 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Max Q, baby! Usually does the trick. K -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek [mailto:absworld at cet.com] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:00 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... AV bay appears to have survived intact (again). Downloaded data reveals the following: PF Hi-Alt 45 reported 7,140'. ARTS-2 data: Max velocity = 2386 fps Max Baro altitude = 11,480' Shred occurred at 6.5 seconds. Expected motor burn was 6.6 seconds (I almost made it ;-) Motor was expected to be progressive but ARTS plot shows regressive. Motor was expected to be an M1110, ARTS reported M942. Expected peak thrust = 1293N at 4 seconds, ARTS reported 1350N at 1.1 seconds. Not sure what fps value to use for MACH but I hit 1000 fps at 2.9 seconds, 1500 fps at 4.2 sec, 2000 fps at 5.4 sec. Doesn't sound like I hung out at any velocity but instead accelerated steadily till shredding. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:32 AM To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? K -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." Bob, This was your problem..... Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as fast as possible. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Sat Oct 10 23:13:32 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 06:13:32 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: Where can I read up on both the dispersion analysis and these "permissive" staging techniques? -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 10:40 PM To: ''Steve Cutonilli'', ''Bob & Ann Yanecek'', ''Fred Azinger'', ''Robert Krausert'', ''Sam Grado'', raystoner99 at comcast.net, ''Cameron Tinder'' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... That's right, Steve. The one thing that we wanted to do with Starsky and Hutch was to stage anywhere but in the transonic range. Two years ago, we kept it at about Mach 1.5; this year we were going to drop to about Mach .6. The "permissive staging" issue is merely a means to limit what can be extreme variation in a dispersion plot when the sustainer of a two-stage is subject to so many variables at sustainer ignition. It is not a requirement of either TRA or the AST but certainly helps "sell" a project with potential chaos in its trajectory. Some of the simulations that we ran resulted in flight cylinders of up to 35 miles. Even at Black Rock, that is easily an issue with trains, towns, property, etc. Personally, I'm not so sure that Class 3 fliers alone should consider such safety features. Many on this list have likely seen two-stage flights that give us cause to exercise body orifices involuntarily. Permissive staging electronics, designed properly and economically viable, would be a welcome addition to the hobby. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:47 PM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... I didn't look at the raw data as Bob did, but extracted from the ARTS2 graphical recording. My booster tube let go just under 6K AGL - the rocket was traveling at nearly 2500 ft/sec, so MaxQBaby indeed. Wish I had a video to understand the booster's continued stable trajectory then flat spin for recovery - that's what you want it to do - call me lucky on that. For precisely as Fred stated - the transonic dwell time should be factored but it becomes more of a concern on a staged project than a minimum diameter one as originally shrugged for virtually any motor you choose to fly - EX rule of thumb established. Starsky-n-Hutch is a very good example for general study - the complement to how Rob and I flew the 50k project a couple years back - S&H when first flown successfully it staged supersonic, right Kent? I already know what I'm going to fly for BALLS19 - a no brainer for step improvement w/o the class-3 burden - the real design hurdle becomes motor-class optimization to stay below the C3 threshold, but still fly on the edge. Begs the questions... How does one even deal with staging sequence inhibiting mechanisms that I've heard about on this list if there isn't a standard for implementation? Is it a TRA requirement or simply a means to gain FAA class-3 acceptance from the resulting gains in dispersion results? /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:28 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Max Q, baby! Usually does the trick. K -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek [mailto:absworld at cet.com] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:00 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... AV bay appears to have survived intact (again). Downloaded data reveals the following: PF Hi-Alt 45 reported 7,140'. ARTS-2 data: Max velocity = 2386 fps Max Baro altitude = 11,480' Shred occurred at 6.5 seconds. Expected motor burn was 6.6 seconds (I almost made it ;-) Motor was expected to be progressive but ARTS plot shows regressive. Motor was expected to be an M1110, ARTS reported M942. Expected peak thrust = 1293N at 4 seconds, ARTS reported 1350N at 1.1 seconds. Not sure what fps value to use for MACH but I hit 1000 fps at 2.9 seconds, 1500 fps at 4.2 sec, 2000 fps at 5.4 sec. Doesn't sound like I hung out at any velocity but instead accelerated steadily till shredding. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:32 AM To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? K -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." Bob, This was your problem..... Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as fast as possible. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Sat Oct 10 23:52:01 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 23:52:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <000801ca4a35$5954c410$0bfe4c30$@newman@comcast.net> References: <000601ca48fd$744316c0$5cc94440$@newman@comcast.net> <804671011BF84DB6B518806B155CE689@steve> <000801ca4a35$5954c410$0bfe4c30$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: <48ef39405a61dcce3b4e5a2b05ff0b86.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> I've been an advocate of what I've usually called "smart staging" ever since the early 1980's when I saw a group out of California crash a rocket called Helix II. If anything goes wrong during stage 1 burn, cancel stage 2 burn and go to alternate recovery mode. It's only sensible with large rockets. Just gotta be sure that your smart staging isn't smart enough to confuse itself! +McG+ > That's right, Steve. The one thing that we wanted to do with Starsky and > Hutch was to stage anywhere but in the transonic range. Two years ago, we > kept it at about Mach 1.5; this year we were going to drop to about Mach > .6. > > The "permissive staging" issue is merely a means to limit what can be > extreme variation in a dispersion plot when the sustainer of a two-stage > is > subject to so many variables at sustainer ignition. It is not a > requirement > of either TRA or the AST but certainly helps "sell" a project with > potential > chaos in its trajectory. Some of the simulations that we ran resulted in > flight cylinders of up to 35 miles. Even at Black Rock, that is easily an > issue with trains, towns, property, etc. > > Personally, I'm not so sure that Class 3 fliers alone should consider such > safety features. Many on this list have likely seen two-stage flights > that > give us cause to exercise body orifices involuntarily. Permissive staging > electronics, designed properly and economically viable, would be a welcome > addition to the hobby. > > Kent > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:47 PM > To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; > 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > I didn't look at the raw data as Bob did, but extracted from the ARTS2 > graphical recording. > > My booster tube let go just under 6K AGL - the rocket was traveling at > nearly 2500 ft/sec, so MaxQBaby indeed. Wish I had a video to > understand the booster's continued stable trajectory then flat spin for > recovery - that's what you want it to do - call me lucky on that. > > For precisely as Fred stated - the transonic dwell time should be > factored but it becomes more of a concern on a staged project than a > minimum diameter one as originally shrugged for virtually any motor you > choose to fly - EX rule of thumb established. > > Starsky-n-Hutch is a very good example for general study - the > complement to how Rob and I flew the 50k project a couple years back - > S&H when first flown successfully it staged supersonic, right Kent? > > I already know what I'm going to fly for BALLS19 - a no brainer for step > improvement w/o the class-3 burden - the real design hurdle becomes > motor-class optimization to stay below the C3 threshold, but still fly > on the edge. > > Begs the questions... How does one even deal with staging sequence > inhibiting mechanisms that I've heard about on this list if there isn't > a standard for implementation? Is it a TRA requirement or simply a > means to gain FAA class-3 acceptance from the resulting gains in > dispersion results? > > /Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:28 AM > To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; > raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > Max Q, baby! Usually does the trick. > > K > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob & Ann Yanecek [mailto:absworld at cet.com] > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:00 AM > To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; > raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > AV bay appears to have survived intact (again). > > Downloaded data reveals the following: > PF Hi-Alt 45 reported 7,140'. > > ARTS-2 data: > Max velocity = 2386 fps > Max Baro altitude = 11,480' > Shred occurred at 6.5 seconds. > Expected motor burn was 6.6 seconds (I almost made it ;-) > Motor was expected to be progressive but ARTS plot shows regressive. > Motor was expected to be an M1110, ARTS reported M942. > Expected peak thrust = 1293N at 4 seconds, ARTS reported 1350N at 1.1 > seconds. > Not sure what fps value to use for MACH but I hit 1000 fps at 2.9 > seconds, 1500 fps at 4.2 sec, 2000 fps at 5.4 sec. > > Doesn't sound like I hung out at any velocity but instead accelerated > steadily till shredding. > > Bob Yanecek > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:32 AM > To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; > raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? > > K > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com > [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM > To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; > raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." > > Bob, > This was your problem..... > Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. > Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic > region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't > push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. > > As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region > as fast as possible. > > FredA > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com > [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM > To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron > Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an > aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things > figured out. > Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. > Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for > extra bight to the airframe. > Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig > (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). > Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of > the fin and tapering towards the edges. > Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. > What could go wrong? > > Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once > again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. > Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores > back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. > Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. > All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 > cores. > > I felt terrible and alone. > > On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits > of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been > there done that'. > > As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. > > MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. > > Bob Yanecek > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com > [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM > To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; > steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I > shredded a > tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off > the > pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. > Altimeter > said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because > my > sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. > > There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. > For > me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But > no! > Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and > avoid > that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. > Greg > Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. > > So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds > > cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the > thrust > SMACK and overall SPEED. > > Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the > topic. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sam Grado" > To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; > > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > > >> To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner > should >> be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! >> >> Sam Grado >> TRA L2 >> >> "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! >> >> sales at pvconly.com >> http://www.pvconly.com >> http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html >> http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets >> >> --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com > wrote: >> >> >> From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" >> Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM >> >> >> Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays > at a >> Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, > it >> should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA > limits >> on casing temperature. /Steve >> >> -----Original Message----- >>>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>>To: Cameron Tinder >>>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >>> >>> >>>No Cameron, >>> >>>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >>> >>>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the > country >>>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power > rocket >>>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and > as I >>>see it , it's NOT ." >>> >>>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >>> >>>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations > of >>>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during > a >>>special launch for this flight. >>> >>>Ray >>> >>>----- Original Message ----- >>>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada > Pacific >>>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Hey Ray, >>> >>> >>> >>>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If > so, >>>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are > not >>>limited to: >>> >>> >>> >>>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even > flown >>>one that has gone supersonic. ) >>> >>>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >>> >>>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >>> >>>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >>> >>>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a > V2, >>>so that does not count! >>> >>>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >>> >>>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >>> >>>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this > level. >>> >>>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Your rules are: >>> >>> >>> >>>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll > tell >>>you motor length we need. >>> >>>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >>> >>>3) We'll provide the motor. >>> >>>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >>> >>>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable > venue >>>for launch will be chosen. >>> >>>6) You must fly in your certification level. >>> >>> >>> >>>I would like to add a few more: >>> >>> >>> >>>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the > bragging >>>rights that come with this "award"! >>> >>>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >>> >>>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >>> >>>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>>early summer. >>> >>>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or > until >>>the other can make the winner fail! >>> >>> >>> >>>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I > am >>>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining > for >>>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! > Frankly, >>>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept > your >>>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this > sort >>>of thing might be quite fun! >>> >>> >>> >>>Best regard, >>> >>> >>> >>>Cameron >>> >>> >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>Rockets mailing list >>>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Sun Oct 11 00:02:40 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (Steve Cutonilli) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:02:40 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <000801ca4a35$5954c410$0bfe4c30$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: <37A0A82C809A438495E9BF7746D33EA3@steve> Good info Kent. Attitude sensing requires (3) rate gyros for precise tracking inclusive of roll compensation - not a trivial task when I looked at it a couple years ago - um, I'm not savvy enough to program integral math. It almost injects too much risk asking the rocketeer to come up with a "permissive staging" solution - that's what I meant about implementation standards - there's a few folks that could pull it off, but we can't hold our breath for the two season development cycle if they started today. Drop to 0.6 Mach for staging? Why? Because of the second year sustainer shred? If Wilkerson can't keep them together then I'm worried about my abilities or anyone else's for that matter. Our 50K project dropped from about Mach 1.3 to 0.8 before the sustainer lit and then we almost lost stability transitioning again - that's why I thought supersonic staging will work best - I obviously have more to learn. I heard thermites in Florida can get as big as shoe-boxes and they battle the sewer crocs all the time... /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 10:41 PM To: 'Steve Cutonilli'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... That's right, Steve. The one thing that we wanted to do with Starsky and Hutch was to stage anywhere but in the transonic range. Two years ago, we kept it at about Mach 1.5; this year we were going to drop to about Mach .6. The "permissive staging" issue is merely a means to limit what can be extreme variation in a dispersion plot when the sustainer of a two-stage is subject to so many variables at sustainer ignition. It is not a requirement of either TRA or the AST but certainly helps "sell" a project with potential chaos in its trajectory. Some of the simulations that we ran resulted in flight cylinders of up to 35 miles. Even at Black Rock, that is easily an issue with trains, towns, property, etc. Personally, I'm not so sure that Class 3 fliers alone should consider such safety features. Many on this list have likely seen two-stage flights that give us cause to exercise body orifices involuntarily. Permissive staging electronics, designed properly and economically viable, would be a welcome addition to the hobby. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:47 PM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... I didn't look at the raw data as Bob did, but extracted from the ARTS2 graphical recording. My booster tube let go just under 6K AGL - the rocket was traveling at nearly 2500 ft/sec, so MaxQBaby indeed. Wish I had a video to understand the booster's continued stable trajectory then flat spin for recovery - that's what you want it to do - call me lucky on that. For precisely as Fred stated - the transonic dwell time should be factored but it becomes more of a concern on a staged project than a minimum diameter one as originally shrugged for virtually any motor you choose to fly - EX rule of thumb established. Starsky-n-Hutch is a very good example for general study - the complement to how Rob and I flew the 50k project a couple years back - S&H when first flown successfully it staged supersonic, right Kent? I already know what I'm going to fly for BALLS19 - a no brainer for step improvement w/o the class-3 burden - the real design hurdle becomes motor-class optimization to stay below the C3 threshold, but still fly on the edge. Begs the questions... How does one even deal with staging sequence inhibiting mechanisms that I've heard about on this list if there isn't a standard for implementation? Is it a TRA requirement or simply a means to gain FAA class-3 acceptance from the resulting gains in dispersion results? /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:28 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Max Q, baby! Usually does the trick. K -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek [mailto:absworld at cet.com] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:00 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... AV bay appears to have survived intact (again). Downloaded data reveals the following: PF Hi-Alt 45 reported 7,140'. ARTS-2 data: Max velocity = 2386 fps Max Baro altitude = 11,480' Shred occurred at 6.5 seconds. Expected motor burn was 6.6 seconds (I almost made it ;-) Motor was expected to be progressive but ARTS plot shows regressive. Motor was expected to be an M1110, ARTS reported M942. Expected peak thrust = 1293N at 4 seconds, ARTS reported 1350N at 1.1 seconds. Not sure what fps value to use for MACH but I hit 1000 fps at 2.9 seconds, 1500 fps at 4.2 sec, 2000 fps at 5.4 sec. Doesn't sound like I hung out at any velocity but instead accelerated steadily till shredding. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:32 AM To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? K -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." Bob, This was your problem..... Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as fast as possible. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From scott at scottsrockets.com Sun Oct 11 04:13:49 2009 From: scott at scottsrockets.com (Scott T Bowers) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 04:13:49 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <37A0A82C809A438495E9BF7746D33EA3@steve> References: <000801ca4a35$5954c410$0bfe4c30$@newman@comcast.net> <37A0A82C809A438495E9BF7746D33EA3@steve> Message-ID: <01A7515921964805A414618CE5E3EE38@Mobile2> The what if's in this thread are fascinating. Reminds me of a project analysis exercise we did for a class many years ago. The project was already laid out, and we had to find 5 possible failure points. Then we had to see how many problems each point could cause. Then find solutions for those points, then start again. The branches of the trouble tree grow quickly and has many branches. Scott T. Bowers www.scottsrockets.com -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Steve Cutonilli Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 12:03 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good info Kent. Attitude sensing requires (3) rate gyros for precise tracking inclusive of roll compensation - not a trivial task when I looked at it a couple years ago - um, I'm not savvy enough to program integral math. It almost injects too much risk asking the rocketeer to come up with a "permissive staging" solution - that's what I meant about implementation standards - there's a few folks that could pull it off, but we can't hold our breath for the two season development cycle if they started today. Drop to 0.6 Mach for staging? Why? Because of the second year sustainer shred? If Wilkerson can't keep them together then I'm worried about my abilities or anyone else's for that matter. Our 50K project dropped from about Mach 1.3 to 0.8 before the sustainer lit and then we almost lost stability transitioning again - that's why I thought supersonic staging will work best - I obviously have more to learn. I heard thermites in Florida can get as big as shoe-boxes and they battle the sewer crocs all the time... /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 10:41 PM To: 'Steve Cutonilli'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... That's right, Steve. The one thing that we wanted to do with Starsky and Hutch was to stage anywhere but in the transonic range. Two years ago, we kept it at about Mach 1.5; this year we were going to drop to about Mach .6. The "permissive staging" issue is merely a means to limit what can be extreme variation in a dispersion plot when the sustainer of a two-stage is subject to so many variables at sustainer ignition. It is not a requirement of either TRA or the AST but certainly helps "sell" a project with potential chaos in its trajectory. Some of the simulations that we ran resulted in flight cylinders of up to 35 miles. Even at Black Rock, that is easily an issue with trains, towns, property, etc. Personally, I'm not so sure that Class 3 fliers alone should consider such safety features. Many on this list have likely seen two-stage flights that give us cause to exercise body orifices involuntarily. Permissive staging electronics, designed properly and economically viable, would be a welcome addition to the hobby. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:47 PM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... I didn't look at the raw data as Bob did, but extracted from the ARTS2 graphical recording. My booster tube let go just under 6K AGL - the rocket was traveling at nearly 2500 ft/sec, so MaxQBaby indeed. Wish I had a video to understand the booster's continued stable trajectory then flat spin for recovery - that's what you want it to do - call me lucky on that. For precisely as Fred stated - the transonic dwell time should be factored but it becomes more of a concern on a staged project than a minimum diameter one as originally shrugged for virtually any motor you choose to fly - EX rule of thumb established. Starsky-n-Hutch is a very good example for general study - the complement to how Rob and I flew the 50k project a couple years back - S&H when first flown successfully it staged supersonic, right Kent? I already know what I'm going to fly for BALLS19 - a no brainer for step improvement w/o the class-3 burden - the real design hurdle becomes motor-class optimization to stay below the C3 threshold, but still fly on the edge. Begs the questions... How does one even deal with staging sequence inhibiting mechanisms that I've heard about on this list if there isn't a standard for implementation? Is it a TRA requirement or simply a means to gain FAA class-3 acceptance from the resulting gains in dispersion results? /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:28 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Max Q, baby! Usually does the trick. K -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek [mailto:absworld at cet.com] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:00 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... AV bay appears to have survived intact (again). Downloaded data reveals the following: PF Hi-Alt 45 reported 7,140'. ARTS-2 data: Max velocity = 2386 fps Max Baro altitude = 11,480' Shred occurred at 6.5 seconds. Expected motor burn was 6.6 seconds (I almost made it ;-) Motor was expected to be progressive but ARTS plot shows regressive. Motor was expected to be an M1110, ARTS reported M942. Expected peak thrust = 1293N at 4 seconds, ARTS reported 1350N at 1.1 seconds. Not sure what fps value to use for MACH but I hit 1000 fps at 2.9 seconds, 1500 fps at 4.2 sec, 2000 fps at 5.4 sec. Doesn't sound like I hung out at any velocity but instead accelerated steadily till shredding. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:32 AM To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? K -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." Bob, This was your problem..... Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as fast as possible. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From andrew at psas.pdx.edu Sun Oct 11 04:42:28 2009 From: andrew at psas.pdx.edu (Andrew Greenberg) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 04:42:28 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Looking for a L3 to help PSAS with Rocketober In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4AD1C4A4.9090505@psas.pdx.edu> Hi everyone! The Portland State Aerospace Society (PSAS: see http://psas.pdx.edu/) would like to come out and launch at this upcoming Rocketober. Usually Peter helps us out (thanks Peter!), but he can't attend this weekend's launch. So we're trying to find a TRA L3 person who's attending Rocketober to help us launch. If you're L3, and you wouldn't mind helping us out with an N2500 launch this coming weekend, please contact me and I'll fill you in on what we'd like to do. Thanks! Andrew -- ------------------------------------------------------- Andrew Greenberg Portland State Aerospace Society (http://psas.pdx.edu/) andrew at psas.pdx.edu P: 503.788.1343 C: 503.708.7711 ------------------------------------------------------- From jhadv at pacifier.com Sun Oct 11 08:37:30 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (Paul Bogdanich) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 08:37:30 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Set Altitude - what rocket to use? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20091011082324.00bd66c8@mail.iinet.com> I built a rocket in a 54mm airframe that flies 38mm motors that sims and achieves all around 8,000 ft AGL for the 720 case depending on what motor you use. Basically it's 47" long, 54mm diameter four fins (4.1" root - 1.75" semi span - clipped delta) dual deploy weighs and 1,685 grams without the motor obviously. The only reason I mention it is I have flown it six times and it has never been more than 100 feet off the simulation for sub-sonic flight. If one took the same basic design and made it a little shorter or longer and adjusted the weight I bet you could get it real close to whatever height you wanted. The key is making the weight and the CG exact. If you engage in a basic build like that, make the weight and CG right on plan and keep it sub-sonic it's been my experience that rock-sim 8 gets real close. When you pump it supersonic you have a few issues. It's very close on the J825, reasonably close on the J570 and way off on the 6GXL CTI motors. From kent.newman at comcast.net Sun Oct 11 09:28:59 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 09:28:59 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <37A0A82C809A438495E9BF7746D33EA3@steve> References: <000801ca4a35$5954c410$0bfe4c30$@newman@comcast.net> <37A0A82C809A438495E9BF7746D33EA3@steve> Message-ID: <000001ca4a8f$f08c8480$d1a58d80$@newman@comcast.net> The permissive staging issue isn't a slam dunk, to be sure. My only thought is that with, first, recognition of the issue, second, realized demand, and, third, capable suppliers meeting that need, we'll have something sooner rather than later if we start now and not 2-3 or more years from now. And I have no idea of the magnitude of the task. Mach .6 staging was chosen in an attempt to maximize altitude, Steve. With a stable sustainer, Mach .6 is clipping along nicely for sustainer ignition. However, if the timing is such that one hits a bad wind shear at that reduced speed, I suppose it could certainly create problems. We look at the historic wind levels/speeds out of NOAA Reno and essentially guess that they will be repeated during our attempts. And, without doubt, we were taking chances on any issues that might occur in dropping through Mach only to fire up and punch through again. .6 was chosen to assure that we would be out of the dreaded transonic range. On that topic, noting your drop to Mach .8 and seeing the sustainer motor came up to pressure and then experienced slight stability issues, I always try to punch through .8 through 1.2 regardless of what is being flown, single stage or otherwise. It goes back to what Fred said: avoid any "dwell time" at mach transition. Could that have been the issue with maintaining stability? The sustainer issue with the first S&H flight was a result of a cracked CTI nozzle, asymmetrical thrust and a dramatic change of AOA at about 2400 fps. Not too many builds tolerate that scenario. Sort of ruined what looked like was going to be a pretty good day :-) Going back to your 50K project, I think that you guys were the highlight of the weekend. Beautiful project and great flight. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 12:03 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good info Kent. Attitude sensing requires (3) rate gyros for precise tracking inclusive of roll compensation - not a trivial task when I looked at it a couple years ago - um, I'm not savvy enough to program integral math. It almost injects too much risk asking the rocketeer to come up with a "permissive staging" solution - that's what I meant about implementation standards - there's a few folks that could pull it off, but we can't hold our breath for the two season development cycle if they started today. Drop to 0.6 Mach for staging? Why? Because of the second year sustainer shred? If Wilkerson can't keep them together then I'm worried about my abilities or anyone else's for that matter. Our 50K project dropped from about Mach 1.3 to 0.8 before the sustainer lit and then we almost lost stability transitioning again - that's why I thought supersonic staging will work best - I obviously have more to learn. I heard thermites in Florida can get as big as shoe-boxes and they battle the sewer crocs all the time... /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 10:41 PM To: 'Steve Cutonilli'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... That's right, Steve. The one thing that we wanted to do with Starsky and Hutch was to stage anywhere but in the transonic range. Two years ago, we kept it at about Mach 1.5; this year we were going to drop to about Mach .6. The "permissive staging" issue is merely a means to limit what can be extreme variation in a dispersion plot when the sustainer of a two-stage is subject to so many variables at sustainer ignition. It is not a requirement of either TRA or the AST but certainly helps "sell" a project with potential chaos in its trajectory. Some of the simulations that we ran resulted in flight cylinders of up to 35 miles. Even at Black Rock, that is easily an issue with trains, towns, property, etc. Personally, I'm not so sure that Class 3 fliers alone should consider such safety features. Many on this list have likely seen two-stage flights that give us cause to exercise body orifices involuntarily. Permissive staging electronics, designed properly and economically viable, would be a welcome addition to the hobby. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:47 PM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... I didn't look at the raw data as Bob did, but extracted from the ARTS2 graphical recording. My booster tube let go just under 6K AGL - the rocket was traveling at nearly 2500 ft/sec, so MaxQBaby indeed. Wish I had a video to understand the booster's continued stable trajectory then flat spin for recovery - that's what you want it to do - call me lucky on that. For precisely as Fred stated - the transonic dwell time should be factored but it becomes more of a concern on a staged project than a minimum diameter one as originally shrugged for virtually any motor you choose to fly - EX rule of thumb established. Starsky-n-Hutch is a very good example for general study - the complement to how Rob and I flew the 50k project a couple years back - S&H when first flown successfully it staged supersonic, right Kent? I already know what I'm going to fly for BALLS19 - a no brainer for step improvement w/o the class-3 burden - the real design hurdle becomes motor-class optimization to stay below the C3 threshold, but still fly on the edge. Begs the questions... How does one even deal with staging sequence inhibiting mechanisms that I've heard about on this list if there isn't a standard for implementation? Is it a TRA requirement or simply a means to gain FAA class-3 acceptance from the resulting gains in dispersion results? /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:28 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Max Q, baby! Usually does the trick. K -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek [mailto:absworld at cet.com] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:00 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... AV bay appears to have survived intact (again). Downloaded data reveals the following: PF Hi-Alt 45 reported 7,140'. ARTS-2 data: Max velocity = 2386 fps Max Baro altitude = 11,480' Shred occurred at 6.5 seconds. Expected motor burn was 6.6 seconds (I almost made it ;-) Motor was expected to be progressive but ARTS plot shows regressive. Motor was expected to be an M1110, ARTS reported M942. Expected peak thrust = 1293N at 4 seconds, ARTS reported 1350N at 1.1 seconds. Not sure what fps value to use for MACH but I hit 1000 fps at 2.9 seconds, 1500 fps at 4.2 sec, 2000 fps at 5.4 sec. Doesn't sound like I hung out at any velocity but instead accelerated steadily till shredding. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:32 AM To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? K -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." Bob, This was your problem..... Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as fast as possible. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Mfreptiles at aol.com Sun Oct 11 09:40:41 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 12:40:41 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: A good compromise to the gyros is to use an altimeter that is programmable to check vertical orientation by using integrated velocity, and baro decreasing. If it drops below a certain speed (programmable by you), it won't light the charge, same if the baro pressure is increasing. It is called smart staging. The Parrot has this feature and is only about $150. Nice little units. Probably not totally fool proof like the gyros, but within realm of most flyers. Mike F. In a message dated 10/11/2009 12:07:02 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes: Good info Kent. Attitude sensing requires (3) rate gyros for precise tracking inclusive of roll compensation - not a trivial task when I looked at it a couple years ago - um, I'm not savvy enough to program integral math. From kent.newman at comcast.net Sun Oct 11 09:51:50 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 09:51:50 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000601ca4a93$21839580$648ac080$@newman@comcast.net> I don't know, Scott. J Permissive staging is a personal interest and I don't even know if it's a proper term. I'm sure that there are more accurate and descriptive terms for it. There are undoubtedly references to it in aerospace texts or NASA docs. Our hobby is usually 50-60 years or more behind professional applications so it has to be out there. The dispersion analyses comes from Monte Carlo simulations of probability functions having normal distributions. The AST wants to see 3 sigma accuracy in 6 DOF simulations of Class 3 rocket projects. That is, they want to see a scatter plot of 1000 simulation runs of a rocket if it came in ballistic on each run. Variable inputs regarding shear winds, launch conditions, launch angles, motor functions, fin alignment, etc. are incorporated into each run. For the hobbyist, "SPLASH" was available to perform such calculations for quite awhile. Apogee took SPLASH off the market and announced an improved version of SPLASH incorporated into Rocksim and called it Rocksim Pro. Pricey ($1000/ copy but there are discounts for RS owners). The sw does have bugs, though. The government and aero industry has some pretty neat stuff (Sandia, etc.) but it's limited to contractors and those with clearance. Kent From: Scott Berfield [mailto:sb at berfield.com] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 11:14 PM To: Kent Newman Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Where can I read up on both the dispersion analysis and these "permissive" staging techniques? -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 10:40 PM To: ''Steve Cutonilli'', ''Bob & Ann Yanecek'', ''Fred Azinger'', ''Robert Krausert'', ''Sam Grado'', raystoner99 at comcast.net, ''Cameron Tinder'' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... That's right, Steve. The one thing that we wanted to do with Starsky and Hutch was to stage anywhere but in the transonic range. Two years ago, we kept it at about Mach 1.5; this year we were going to drop to about Mach .6. The "permissive staging" issue is merely a means to limit what can be extreme variation in a dispersion plot when the sustainer of a two-stage is subject to so many variables at sustainer ignition. It is not a requirement of either TRA or the AST but certainly helps "sell" a project with potential chaos in its trajectory. Some of the simulations that we ran resulted in flight cylinders of up to 35 miles. Even at Black Rock, that is easily an issue with trains, towns, property, etc. Personally, I'm not so sure that Class 3 fliers alone should consider such safety features. Many on this list have likely seen two-stage flights that give us cause to exercise body orifices involuntarily. Permissive staging electronics, designed properly and economically viable, would be a welcome addition to the hobby. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:47 PM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... I didn't look at the raw data as Bob did, but extracted from the ARTS2 graphical recording. My booster tube let go just under 6K AGL - the rocket was traveling at nearly 2500 ft/sec, so MaxQBaby indeed. Wish I had a video to understand the booster's continued stable trajectory then flat spin for recovery - that's what you want it to do - call me lucky on that. For precisely as Fred stated - the transonic dwell time should be factored but it becomes more of a concern on a staged project than a minimum diameter one as originally shrugged for virtually any motor you choose to fly - EX rule of thumb established. Starsky-n-Hutch is a very good example for general study - the complement to how Rob and I flew the 50k project a couple years back - S&H when first flown successfully it staged supersonic, right Kent? I already know what I'm going to fly for BALLS19 - a no brainer for step improvement w/o the class-3 burden - the real design hurdle becomes motor-class optimization to stay below the C3 threshold, but still fly on the edge. Begs the questions... How does one even deal with staging sequence inhibiting mechanisms that I've heard about on this list if there isn't a standard for implementation? Is it a TRA requirement or simply a means to gain FAA class-3 acceptance from the resulting gains in dispersion results? /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:28 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Max Q, baby! Usually does the trick. K -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek [mailto:absworld at cet.com] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:00 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... AV bay appears to have survived intact (again). Downloaded data reveals the following: PF Hi-Alt 45 reported 7,140'. ARTS-2 data: Max velocity = 2386 fps Max Baro altitude = 11,480' Shred occurred at 6.5 seconds. Expected motor burn was 6.6 seconds (I almost made it ;-) Motor was expected to be progressive but ARTS plot shows regressive. Motor was expected to be an M1110, ARTS reported M942. Expected peak thrust = 1293N at 4 seconds, ARTS reported 1350N at 1.1 seconds. Not sure what fps value to use for MACH but I hit 1000 fps at 2.9 seconds, 1500 fps at 4.2 sec, 2000 fps at 5.4 sec. Doesn't sound like I hung out at any velocity but instead accelerated steadily till shredding. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:32 AM To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? K -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." Bob, This was your problem..... Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as fast as possible. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From kent.newman at comcast.net Sun Oct 11 09:55:12 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 09:55:12 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001401ca4a93$9a2d2be0$ce8783a0$@newman@comcast.net> The Jopsons were telling me about the Parrot. If I understand correctly, Adrian is working on another unit with enhanced capability as well. Sounds pretty interesting and is certainly pointed in the right direction. Kent From: Mfreptiles at aol.com [mailto:Mfreptiles at aol.com] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 9:41 AM To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com; kent.newman at comcast.net; absworld at cet.com; fred at azinger.com; lawndart.robert at gmail.com; vonrang at yahoo.com; raystoner99 at comcast.net; sealtee at cableone.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... A good compromise to the gyros is to use an altimeter that is programmable to check vertical orientation by using integrated velocity, and baro decreasing. If it drops below a certain speed (programmable by you), it won't light the charge, same if the baro pressure is increasing. It is called smart staging. The Parrot has this feature and is only about $150. Nice little units. Probably not totally fool proof like the gyros, but within realm of most flyers. Mike F. In a message dated 10/11/2009 12:07:02 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes: Good info Kent. Attitude sensing requires (3) rate gyros for precise tracking inclusive of roll compensation - not a trivial task when I looked at it a couple years ago - um, I'm not savvy enough to program integral math. From Mfreptiles at aol.com Sun Oct 11 09:44:22 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 12:44:22 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Message-ID: Forgot, it can also be set to not light unless it has achieved a certain altitude, set by the user. Just a satisfied user. :) Mike F. In a message dated 10/11/2009 9:45:55 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Mfreptiles at aol.com writes: A good compromise to the gyros is to use an altimeter that is programmable to check vertical orientation by using integrated velocity, and baro decreasing. If it drops below a certain speed (programmable by you), it won't light the charge, same if the baro pressure is increasing. It is called smart staging. The Parrot has this feature and is only about $150. Nice little units. Probably not totally fool proof like the gyros, but within realm of most flyers. Mike F. From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 16:53:30 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 16:53:30 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Paper/cardboard Tubing - Free Message-ID: <124A4FEC85F64F958A3520BA19C18A6C@LaptopKrausert> Hello, I was just doing recycling and came across two tubes that I nearly put in the bin, but figured I'd ask first. My daughter just got two posters, a periodic table and the other a world map. They both came in separate paper shipping tubes. They are both sturdy little tubes. 1st; 36 inches long and 3 inch diameter. I tested with a 3" nosecone, and with some sanding - it would fit nicely. Great looking tube, easy to paint - as the grooves are non-existent. Might handle an F or G. 2nd; a 30 inches long and 2-1/2" diameter. It had some clear tape on it, and I removed it. Might have reduced structure integrity. But for anything in the low power class, it should be fine. Only took part of the top layer off in spots. If you'd like these FREE airframes, please let me know. I'd rather them get used for a great purpose versus going to the swill factory to be turned into tomorrows newspaper. If shipping is needed, that's fine. Just odd to visit the post office to ship shipping items. ;-) If you live near me, we can find a meeting spot. But happy to ship them. If you want them, please ask. Potential for two great rockets for training/educating your youth. Again, I only have the tubes. Cheers, Robert From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 20:52:42 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:52:42 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] [OROC Members] 10/11 Wilsonville Memorial Park Launch Report References: <1255312319-sup-4328@keithp.com> Message-ID: <78E47C9E2DE842AAA2D94859A71E8447@LaptopKrausert> Keith, Great report. I've ordered you a PA system like mine. That way you'll have it when work pulls me away. Great report. Sorry about the wind and reloc. As I told Tim eariler, I wish I was there. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Packard" To: "members" ; "rockets" Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 7:01 PM Subject: [OROC Members] 10/11 Wilsonville Memorial Park Launch Report > _______________________________________________ > Members mailing list > Members at oregonrocketry.org > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/members > From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Sun Oct 11 20:54:47 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (Steve Cutonilli) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:54:47 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <000001ca4a8f$f08c8480$d1a58d80$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: Kent, I saw the supersonic staging event of S&H and you've explained the fault modes encountered with the sustainer breakup which isn't related to the staging sequence, so why make the change to 0.6 Mach again and not repeat what worked before? Marty's two-stage project at BALLS18 sequenced perfectly when traveling SS - 75mm to 54mm as I recall. I'm assuming second to third sustainer on TripleThreat did similar. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 9:29 AM To: 'Steve Cutonilli'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... The permissive staging issue isn't a slam dunk, to be sure. My only thought is that with, first, recognition of the issue, second, realized demand, and, third, capable suppliers meeting that need, we'll have something sooner rather than later if we start now and not 2-3 or more years from now. And I have no idea of the magnitude of the task. Mach .6 staging was chosen in an attempt to maximize altitude, Steve. With a stable sustainer, Mach .6 is clipping along nicely for sustainer ignition. However, if the timing is such that one hits a bad wind shear at that reduced speed, I suppose it could certainly create problems. We look at the historic wind levels/speeds out of NOAA Reno and essentially guess that they will be repeated during our attempts. And, without doubt, we were taking chances on any issues that might occur in dropping through Mach only to fire up and punch through again. .6 was chosen to assure that we would be out of the dreaded transonic range. On that topic, noting your drop to Mach .8 and seeing the sustainer motor came up to pressure and then experienced slight stability issues, I always try to punch through .8 through 1.2 regardless of what is being flown, single stage or otherwise. It goes back to what Fred said: avoid any "dwell time" at mach transition. Could that have been the issue with maintaining stability? The sustainer issue with the first S&H flight was a result of a cracked CTI nozzle, asymmetrical thrust and a dramatic change of AOA at about 2400 fps. Not too many builds tolerate that scenario. Sort of ruined what looked like was going to be a pretty good day :-) Going back to your 50K project, I think that you guys were the highlight of the weekend. Beautiful project and great flight. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 12:03 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good info Kent. Attitude sensing requires (3) rate gyros for precise tracking inclusive of roll compensation - not a trivial task when I looked at it a couple years ago - um, I'm not savvy enough to program integral math. It almost injects too much risk asking the rocketeer to come up with a "permissive staging" solution - that's what I meant about implementation standards - there's a few folks that could pull it off, but we can't hold our breath for the two season development cycle if they started today. Drop to 0.6 Mach for staging? Why? Because of the second year sustainer shred? If Wilkerson can't keep them together then I'm worried about my abilities or anyone else's for that matter. Our 50K project dropped from about Mach 1.3 to 0.8 before the sustainer lit and then we almost lost stability transitioning again - that's why I thought supersonic staging will work best - I obviously have more to learn. I heard thermites in Florida can get as big as shoe-boxes and they battle the sewer crocs all the time... /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 10:41 PM To: 'Steve Cutonilli'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... That's right, Steve. The one thing that we wanted to do with Starsky and Hutch was to stage anywhere but in the transonic range. Two years ago, we kept it at about Mach 1.5; this year we were going to drop to about Mach .6. The "permissive staging" issue is merely a means to limit what can be extreme variation in a dispersion plot when the sustainer of a two-stage is subject to so many variables at sustainer ignition. It is not a requirement of either TRA or the AST but certainly helps "sell" a project with potential chaos in its trajectory. Some of the simulations that we ran resulted in flight cylinders of up to 35 miles. Even at Black Rock, that is easily an issue with trains, towns, property, etc. Personally, I'm not so sure that Class 3 fliers alone should consider such safety features. Many on this list have likely seen two-stage flights that give us cause to exercise body orifices involuntarily. Permissive staging electronics, designed properly and economically viable, would be a welcome addition to the hobby. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:47 PM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... I didn't look at the raw data as Bob did, but extracted from the ARTS2 graphical recording. My booster tube let go just under 6K AGL - the rocket was traveling at nearly 2500 ft/sec, so MaxQBaby indeed. Wish I had a video to understand the booster's continued stable trajectory then flat spin for recovery - that's what you want it to do - call me lucky on that. For precisely as Fred stated - the transonic dwell time should be factored but it becomes more of a concern on a staged project than a minimum diameter one as originally shrugged for virtually any motor you choose to fly - EX rule of thumb established. Starsky-n-Hutch is a very good example for general study - the complement to how Rob and I flew the 50k project a couple years back - S&H when first flown successfully it staged supersonic, right Kent? I already know what I'm going to fly for BALLS19 - a no brainer for step improvement w/o the class-3 burden - the real design hurdle becomes motor-class optimization to stay below the C3 threshold, but still fly on the edge. Begs the questions... How does one even deal with staging sequence inhibiting mechanisms that I've heard about on this list if there isn't a standard for implementation? Is it a TRA requirement or simply a means to gain FAA class-3 acceptance from the resulting gains in dispersion results? /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:28 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Max Q, baby! Usually does the trick. K -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek [mailto:absworld at cet.com] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:00 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... AV bay appears to have survived intact (again). Downloaded data reveals the following: PF Hi-Alt 45 reported 7,140'. ARTS-2 data: Max velocity = 2386 fps Max Baro altitude = 11,480' Shred occurred at 6.5 seconds. Expected motor burn was 6.6 seconds (I almost made it ;-) Motor was expected to be progressive but ARTS plot shows regressive. Motor was expected to be an M1110, ARTS reported M942. Expected peak thrust = 1293N at 4 seconds, ARTS reported 1350N at 1.1 seconds. Not sure what fps value to use for MACH but I hit 1000 fps at 2.9 seconds, 1500 fps at 4.2 sec, 2000 fps at 5.4 sec. Doesn't sound like I hung out at any velocity but instead accelerated steadily till shredding. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:32 AM To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? K -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." Bob, This was your problem..... Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as fast as possible. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From kent.newman at comcast.net Sun Oct 11 21:36:02 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 21:36:02 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: References: <000001ca4a8f$f08c8480$d1a58d80$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: <001601ca4af5$81d3ba20$857b2e60$@newman@comcast.net> For altitude, Steve. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 8:55 PM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Kent, I saw the supersonic staging event of S&H and you've explained the fault modes encountered with the sustainer breakup which isn't related to the staging sequence, so why make the change to 0.6 Mach again and not repeat what worked before? Marty's two-stage project at BALLS18 sequenced perfectly when traveling SS - 75mm to 54mm as I recall. I'm assuming second to third sustainer on TripleThreat did similar. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 9:29 AM To: 'Steve Cutonilli'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... The permissive staging issue isn't a slam dunk, to be sure. My only thought is that with, first, recognition of the issue, second, realized demand, and, third, capable suppliers meeting that need, we'll have something sooner rather than later if we start now and not 2-3 or more years from now. And I have no idea of the magnitude of the task. Mach .6 staging was chosen in an attempt to maximize altitude, Steve. With a stable sustainer, Mach .6 is clipping along nicely for sustainer ignition. However, if the timing is such that one hits a bad wind shear at that reduced speed, I suppose it could certainly create problems. We look at the historic wind levels/speeds out of NOAA Reno and essentially guess that they will be repeated during our attempts. And, without doubt, we were taking chances on any issues that might occur in dropping through Mach only to fire up and punch through again. .6 was chosen to assure that we would be out of the dreaded transonic range. On that topic, noting your drop to Mach .8 and seeing the sustainer motor came up to pressure and then experienced slight stability issues, I always try to punch through .8 through 1.2 regardless of what is being flown, single stage or otherwise. It goes back to what Fred said: avoid any "dwell time" at mach transition. Could that have been the issue with maintaining stability? The sustainer issue with the first S&H flight was a result of a cracked CTI nozzle, asymmetrical thrust and a dramatic change of AOA at about 2400 fps. Not too many builds tolerate that scenario. Sort of ruined what looked like was going to be a pretty good day :-) Going back to your 50K project, I think that you guys were the highlight of the weekend. Beautiful project and great flight. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 12:03 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good info Kent. Attitude sensing requires (3) rate gyros for precise tracking inclusive of roll compensation - not a trivial task when I looked at it a couple years ago - um, I'm not savvy enough to program integral math. It almost injects too much risk asking the rocketeer to come up with a "permissive staging" solution - that's what I meant about implementation standards - there's a few folks that could pull it off, but we can't hold our breath for the two season development cycle if they started today. Drop to 0.6 Mach for staging? Why? Because of the second year sustainer shred? If Wilkerson can't keep them together then I'm worried about my abilities or anyone else's for that matter. Our 50K project dropped from about Mach 1.3 to 0.8 before the sustainer lit and then we almost lost stability transitioning again - that's why I thought supersonic staging will work best - I obviously have more to learn. I heard thermites in Florida can get as big as shoe-boxes and they battle the sewer crocs all the time... /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 10:41 PM To: 'Steve Cutonilli'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... That's right, Steve. The one thing that we wanted to do with Starsky and Hutch was to stage anywhere but in the transonic range. Two years ago, we kept it at about Mach 1.5; this year we were going to drop to about Mach .6. The "permissive staging" issue is merely a means to limit what can be extreme variation in a dispersion plot when the sustainer of a two-stage is subject to so many variables at sustainer ignition. It is not a requirement of either TRA or the AST but certainly helps "sell" a project with potential chaos in its trajectory. Some of the simulations that we ran resulted in flight cylinders of up to 35 miles. Even at Black Rock, that is easily an issue with trains, towns, property, etc. Personally, I'm not so sure that Class 3 fliers alone should consider such safety features. Many on this list have likely seen two-stage flights that give us cause to exercise body orifices involuntarily. Permissive staging electronics, designed properly and economically viable, would be a welcome addition to the hobby. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:47 PM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... I didn't look at the raw data as Bob did, but extracted from the ARTS2 graphical recording. My booster tube let go just under 6K AGL - the rocket was traveling at nearly 2500 ft/sec, so MaxQBaby indeed. Wish I had a video to understand the booster's continued stable trajectory then flat spin for recovery - that's what you want it to do - call me lucky on that. For precisely as Fred stated - the transonic dwell time should be factored but it becomes more of a concern on a staged project than a minimum diameter one as originally shrugged for virtually any motor you choose to fly - EX rule of thumb established. Starsky-n-Hutch is a very good example for general study - the complement to how Rob and I flew the 50k project a couple years back - S&H when first flown successfully it staged supersonic, right Kent? I already know what I'm going to fly for BALLS19 - a no brainer for step improvement w/o the class-3 burden - the real design hurdle becomes motor-class optimization to stay below the C3 threshold, but still fly on the edge. Begs the questions... How does one even deal with staging sequence inhibiting mechanisms that I've heard about on this list if there isn't a standard for implementation? Is it a TRA requirement or simply a means to gain FAA class-3 acceptance from the resulting gains in dispersion results? /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:28 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Max Q, baby! Usually does the trick. K -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek [mailto:absworld at cet.com] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:00 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... AV bay appears to have survived intact (again). Downloaded data reveals the following: PF Hi-Alt 45 reported 7,140'. ARTS-2 data: Max velocity = 2386 fps Max Baro altitude = 11,480' Shred occurred at 6.5 seconds. Expected motor burn was 6.6 seconds (I almost made it ;-) Motor was expected to be progressive but ARTS plot shows regressive. Motor was expected to be an M1110, ARTS reported M942. Expected peak thrust = 1293N at 4 seconds, ARTS reported 1350N at 1.1 seconds. Not sure what fps value to use for MACH but I hit 1000 fps at 2.9 seconds, 1500 fps at 4.2 sec, 2000 fps at 5.4 sec. Doesn't sound like I hung out at any velocity but instead accelerated steadily till shredding. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:32 AM To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? K -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." Bob, This was your problem..... Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as fast as possible. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Sun Oct 11 22:02:17 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (Steve Cutonilli) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 22:02:17 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: <001601ca4af5$81d3ba20$857b2e60$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: <109B52829B974DD780357BC0F40A3E6B@steve> Ah, right - so going transonic twice isn't as big a drag penalty as it is made out to be - then again, I'm skeptical of the modeling tools. I'm also of the opinion the original thread has been de-railed significantly, so apologies for that - I'll shut-up now. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 9:36 PM To: 'Steve Cutonilli'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... For altitude, Steve. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 8:55 PM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Kent, I saw the supersonic staging event of S&H and you've explained the fault modes encountered with the sustainer breakup which isn't related to the staging sequence, so why make the change to 0.6 Mach again and not repeat what worked before? Marty's two-stage project at BALLS18 sequenced perfectly when traveling SS - 75mm to 54mm as I recall. I'm assuming second to third sustainer on TripleThreat did similar. /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 9:29 AM To: 'Steve Cutonilli'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... The permissive staging issue isn't a slam dunk, to be sure. My only thought is that with, first, recognition of the issue, second, realized demand, and, third, capable suppliers meeting that need, we'll have something sooner rather than later if we start now and not 2-3 or more years from now. And I have no idea of the magnitude of the task. Mach .6 staging was chosen in an attempt to maximize altitude, Steve. With a stable sustainer, Mach .6 is clipping along nicely for sustainer ignition. However, if the timing is such that one hits a bad wind shear at that reduced speed, I suppose it could certainly create problems. We look at the historic wind levels/speeds out of NOAA Reno and essentially guess that they will be repeated during our attempts. And, without doubt, we were taking chances on any issues that might occur in dropping through Mach only to fire up and punch through again. .6 was chosen to assure that we would be out of the dreaded transonic range. On that topic, noting your drop to Mach .8 and seeing the sustainer motor came up to pressure and then experienced slight stability issues, I always try to punch through .8 through 1.2 regardless of what is being flown, single stage or otherwise. It goes back to what Fred said: avoid any "dwell time" at mach transition. Could that have been the issue with maintaining stability? The sustainer issue with the first S&H flight was a result of a cracked CTI nozzle, asymmetrical thrust and a dramatic change of AOA at about 2400 fps. Not too many builds tolerate that scenario. Sort of ruined what looked like was going to be a pretty good day :-) Going back to your 50K project, I think that you guys were the highlight of the weekend. Beautiful project and great flight. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 12:03 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good info Kent. Attitude sensing requires (3) rate gyros for precise tracking inclusive of roll compensation - not a trivial task when I looked at it a couple years ago - um, I'm not savvy enough to program integral math. It almost injects too much risk asking the rocketeer to come up with a "permissive staging" solution - that's what I meant about implementation standards - there's a few folks that could pull it off, but we can't hold our breath for the two season development cycle if they started today. Drop to 0.6 Mach for staging? Why? Because of the second year sustainer shred? If Wilkerson can't keep them together then I'm worried about my abilities or anyone else's for that matter. Our 50K project dropped from about Mach 1.3 to 0.8 before the sustainer lit and then we almost lost stability transitioning again - that's why I thought supersonic staging will work best - I obviously have more to learn. I heard thermites in Florida can get as big as shoe-boxes and they battle the sewer crocs all the time... /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 10:41 PM To: 'Steve Cutonilli'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... That's right, Steve. The one thing that we wanted to do with Starsky and Hutch was to stage anywhere but in the transonic range. Two years ago, we kept it at about Mach 1.5; this year we were going to drop to about Mach .6. The "permissive staging" issue is merely a means to limit what can be extreme variation in a dispersion plot when the sustainer of a two-stage is subject to so many variables at sustainer ignition. It is not a requirement of either TRA or the AST but certainly helps "sell" a project with potential chaos in its trajectory. Some of the simulations that we ran resulted in flight cylinders of up to 35 miles. Even at Black Rock, that is easily an issue with trains, towns, property, etc. Personally, I'm not so sure that Class 3 fliers alone should consider such safety features. Many on this list have likely seen two-stage flights that give us cause to exercise body orifices involuntarily. Permissive staging electronics, designed properly and economically viable, would be a welcome addition to the hobby. Kent -----Original Message----- From: Steve Cutonilli [mailto:steve-c at ix.netcom.com] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:47 PM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... I didn't look at the raw data as Bob did, but extracted from the ARTS2 graphical recording. My booster tube let go just under 6K AGL - the rocket was traveling at nearly 2500 ft/sec, so MaxQBaby indeed. Wish I had a video to understand the booster's continued stable trajectory then flat spin for recovery - that's what you want it to do - call me lucky on that. For precisely as Fred stated - the transonic dwell time should be factored but it becomes more of a concern on a staged project than a minimum diameter one as originally shrugged for virtually any motor you choose to fly - EX rule of thumb established. Starsky-n-Hutch is a very good example for general study - the complement to how Rob and I flew the 50k project a couple years back - S&H when first flown successfully it staged supersonic, right Kent? I already know what I'm going to fly for BALLS19 - a no brainer for step improvement w/o the class-3 burden - the real design hurdle becomes motor-class optimization to stay below the C3 threshold, but still fly on the edge. Begs the questions... How does one even deal with staging sequence inhibiting mechanisms that I've heard about on this list if there isn't a standard for implementation? Is it a TRA requirement or simply a means to gain FAA class-3 acceptance from the resulting gains in dispersion results? /Steve -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:28 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Max Q, baby! Usually does the trick. K -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek [mailto:absworld at cet.com] Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:00 AM To: 'Kent Newman'; 'Fred Azinger'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... AV bay appears to have survived intact (again). Downloaded data reveals the following: PF Hi-Alt 45 reported 7,140'. ARTS-2 data: Max velocity = 2386 fps Max Baro altitude = 11,480' Shred occurred at 6.5 seconds. Expected motor burn was 6.6 seconds (I almost made it ;-) Motor was expected to be progressive but ARTS plot shows regressive. Motor was expected to be an M1110, ARTS reported M942. Expected peak thrust = 1293N at 4 seconds, ARTS reported 1350N at 1.1 seconds. Not sure what fps value to use for MACH but I hit 1000 fps at 2.9 seconds, 1500 fps at 4.2 sec, 2000 fps at 5.4 sec. Doesn't sound like I hung out at any velocity but instead accelerated steadily till shredding. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman [mailto:kent.newman at comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:32 AM To: 'Fred Azinger'; 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Good point. Did you get any data, Bobert? K -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:56 AM To: 'Bob & Ann Yanecek'; 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... "Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor." Bob, This was your problem..... Slower push means a longer time sitting in the transonic region. Possibly slow enough that the motor can't get you through the transonic region -- you become "parked" there as drag is huge and the motor can't push through..... can you say shred-o-matic. As with traffic intersections -- get you butt through the danger region as fast as possible. FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:22 AM To: 'Robert Krausert'; 'Sam Grado'; raystoner99 at comcast.net; 'Cameron Tinder'; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... After my shred from last year which cleanly stripped the fins on an aggressive push, I came back this year just to prove I had things figured out. Scuffed up the 1/8" G10 cores with 36 grit auto sanding discs. Incorporated 3 discontinuous slots and matching 'teeth' on each fin for extra bight to the airframe. Kluged a copy of John Coker's fin can laminating jig (http://www.jcrocket.com/tttjig.shtml). Layered 6 oz. FG with 5.7 oz. CF building heavier at the center/root of the fin and tapering towards the edges. Backed off on the push for a lower thrust longer burn motor. What could go wrong? Instead of shredding at 4K', I made it all the way to 7K' before once again, cleanly stripping my fins and shredding. Thanks to those searching for other things, I got 2 of the fin cores back along with 3 of FG/CF surface layers. Result, 36 grit scuffed G10 ain't nuthin when it comes to adhesion. All of the recovered pieces revealed a clean separation from the G10 cores. I felt terrible and alone. On the bright(er) side, I was not just consoled but also tossed tidbits of improvements to try next time around by folks who've already 'been there done that'. As the weekend progressed, I can only say I felt less lonely. MOD-III version of the fin can is now in the early design phases. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Krausert Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:08 PM To: Sam Grado; raystoner99 at comcast.net; Cameron Tinder; steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... Everyone keeps bringing up hard hitting thrust shreds. In July I shredded a tip-to-tip glassed fin can on an itty-bitty K250. Not the big smack off the pad, but flat burn for the 1st 5 seconds of the 10 second burn. Altimeter said it reached 1147 fps at 4.7 seconds. I never expected that, because my sim data never showed it going beyong 850-900 fps. Sim and I were wrong. There are two things; G-forces initially/sustained and maximum speed. For me, yes I was nervious, but expected a clean climb to 8000 feetish. But no! Speed took my "bleeping" G10 glasses fins for a different ride. Oh and avoid that 1/8" G10 if you're thinking the rocket will move. Even glassed. Greg Clark laughed when he saw how clean my fins were ripped out. So I promise that I will never say on this list or to anyone that shreds cannot happen if you build correctly. The build must comprehend the thrust SMACK and overall SPEED. Off to duct tape my fins back on. Sorry for the caps. Seemed to fit the topic. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Grado" To: ; "Cameron Tinder" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To really test the limits of the airframe a heat conductive liner should > be employed for the M/M. Just another great idea! > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Wed, 10/7/09, steve-c at ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... > To: raystoner99 at comcast.net, "Cameron Tinder" > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:55 AM > > > Ray - I hope this includes disqualification if the test subject stays at a > Holiday-Inn Express, say within a 36-hr period of the challenge? Oh, it > should also be noted that the motor builder be exempt from any NFPA limits > on casing temperature. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:23 AM >>To: Cameron Tinder >>Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >>No Cameron, >> >>This a challenge for the original poster to take. It is for him only. >> >>He doesn't understand how the premier amateur rocketeers in the country >>can't build an unshredable rocket when he can. Regarding high power rocket >>construction, I'll quote him "it just didn't seem all that hard, and as I >>see it , it's NOT ." >> >>I would like to try to expand his knowledge a bit. >> >>I would never like to see this as a contest. The safety considerations of >>a flight like this are just too high. I envision a small group, during a >>special launch for this flight. >> >>Ray >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Cameron Tinder" >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com, raystoner99 at comcast.net >>Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:46:10 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific >>Subject: A gauntlet has been thrown... >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ray, >> >> >> >>Does this challenge apply to all that are foolish enough to accept? If so, >>I would like to be one of the first! My qualifications are, but are not >>limited to: >> >> >> >>1) I too have never shredded a rocket. ( Actually, I have never even flown >>one that has gone supersonic. ) >> >>2) I have zippered only one HPR rocket. >> >>3) I have lawn darted only one low power rocket accidently. >> >>4) I have core sampled only one low power rocket. >> >>5) I have only ripped the eyebolt out of the nose of one HPR rocket, a V2, >>so that does not count! >> >>6) I have only had one HPR rocket "almost" come in ballistic. >> >>7) I am not an engineer, nor have I ever played one on TV. >> >>8) I am L2 and have zero flights under my belt since getting this level. >> >>9) I own a legal copy off RockSim. >> >> >> >> >> >>Your rules are: >> >> >> >>1) Minimum diameter, you choose the diameter (54mm or greater), we'll tell >>you motor length we need. >> >>2) Build using your "standard" un-shred-able technique. >> >>3) We'll provide the motor. >> >>4) You provide the airframe and all electronics, etc. >> >>5) Based on diameter of airframe and expected altitude, a suitable venue >>for launch will be chosen. >> >>6) You must fly in your certification level. >> >> >> >>I would like to add a few more: >> >> >> >>1) No CATO guarantee - We CATO, I win and will be awarded all the bragging >>rights that come with this "award"! >> >>2) You provide me ahead of time the motor dimensions - length, weight >>thrust ring location etc. or even let me see the case ahead of time. >> >>3) Give me estimated motor performance characteristics ahead of time. >> >>4) Fly on research day of FITS or other research day in the spring or >>early summer. >> >>5) The "winner" will have complete bragging rights for one year or until >>the other can make the winner fail! >> >> >> >>I am not promising that I can in fact build a "shred-proof" rocket, I am >>promising that I will try. This could be quite fun and entertaining for >>you and I and humbling to those that take themselves too serious! Frankly, >>if this challenge is open to all, I would like to see others accept your >>challenge as well! In fact a launch that just simply focuses on this sort >>of thing might be quite fun! >> >> >> >>Best regard, >> >> >> >>Cameron >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 22:44:53 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 22:44:53 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Christopher Guenther Date: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:38 PM Subject: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? To: Robert Krausert I will bet that has your eyebrows reaching for the sky and your right hand scratchn your head. While your left hand is feeling if you still have a hart beat. Have you ever seen that bouncy ball they make for kids. You know the one that has a circuit board and LED's in it. It lights up when is senses a significant impact. What if you made your electronics bay and had all your wiring done then filled it with that material. Of course you would have to delicately drill holes in the material in strategic areas. But if all else fails and you get a lawn dart at least the electronics bay wont be destroyed. Although you may end up chasing it for miles as it bounces on down the field... What do you think? Chris Guenther From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Sun Oct 11 22:46:25 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 22:46:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] A gauntlet has been thrown... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7070363cc119d191c4cb826566a93506.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Yes, 'smart staging' doesn't have to be terribly complex--or smart. In the case of Helix II, a massively clustered rocket, it could have been as simple as a thrust/acceleration sensor to just answer the basic question, "Did we get most of the motors lit?" That alone could have prevented a crash under power ten feet from a vehicle and one person. For several years after that I occasionally studied optical methods, essentially, how to tell the difference between sky and ground. I concluded that wasn't generally practical, although it's easy on completely cloudless days. This was the early 1980's and microprocessors of sufficient power were still to big and power hungry, not to mention expensive. The Parrot sounds like a good start on smart staging standards for modern electronics. +McG+ > Forgot, it can also be set to not light unless it has achieved a certain > altitude, set by the user. > Just a satisfied user. :) > > Mike F. > > > In a message dated 10/11/2009 9:45:55 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > Mfreptiles at aol.com writes: > > A good compromise to the gyros is to use an altimeter that is > programmable > > to check vertical orientation by using integrated velocity, and baro > decreasing. If it drops below a certain speed (programmable by you), it > won't > light the charge, same if the baro pressure is increasing. It is called > smart staging. > > The Parrot has this feature and is only about $150. Nice little units. > Probably not totally fool proof like the gyros, but within realm of most > flyers. > > Mike F. > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From pmschurke at seattleschools.org Mon Oct 12 06:45:24 2009 From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org (Schurke, Peter) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 06:45:24 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? References: Message-ID: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B3002DB@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> Intriguing idea, but how do you change the batteries, reprogram the altimeter, etc...? Casting your avionics in superball material would also render any barometric sensors somewhat less than functional (read as: inoperable). Last thing I can think of is that you'd essentially only be able to use that altimeter in rockets of a given diameter. Forget using one altimeter in three or four different sized rockets...your bay only fits in one. Casting the whole bay definitely wouldn't work, but there's plenty of ways to cushion the bay. Keep thinkin' and keep coming up with ideas. Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St. Seattle, WA 98133 ________________________________ From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Christopher Guenther Sent: Sun 10/11/2009 10:44 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Christopher Guenther Date: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:38 PM Subject: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? To: Robert Krausert I will bet that has your eyebrows reaching for the sky and your right hand scratchn your head. While your left hand is feeling if you still have a hart beat. Have you ever seen that bouncy ball they make for kids. You know the one that has a circuit board and LED's in it. It lights up when is senses a significant impact. What if you made your electronics bay and had all your wiring done then filled it with that material. Of course you would have to delicately drill holes in the material in strategic areas. But if all else fails and you get a lawn dart at least the electronics bay wont be destroyed. Although you may end up chasing it for miles as it bounces on down the field... What do you think? Chris Guenther _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Mon Oct 12 07:20:34 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:20:34 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? Message-ID: <200910121420.n9CEKb2U002558@omr8.networksolutionsemail.com> Potting electronics in epoxy is pretty common, but I haven't ever seen a solid block like you describr. I have always wanted to do a hardened ebay of some sort. Possibly designed to shear loose on ground impact and icorporating energy disipating crush zones. But probably won't get around to it. -----Original Message----- From: Christopher Guenther Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 10:44 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Christopher Guenther Date: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:38 PM Subject: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? To: Robert Krausert I will bet that has your eyebrows reaching for the sky and your right hand scratchn your head. While your left hand is feeling if you still have a hart beat. Have you ever seen that bouncy ball they make for kids. You know the one that has a circuit board and LED's in it. It lights up when is senses a significant impact. What if you made your electronics bay and had all your wiring done then filled it with that material. Of course you would have to delicately drill holes in the material in strategic areas. But if all else fails and you get a lawn dart at least the electronics bay wont be destroyed. Although you may end up chasing it for miles as it bounces on down the field... What do you think? Chris Guenther _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From bradwr at wrightholdings.com Mon Oct 12 08:10:33 2009 From: bradwr at wrightholdings.com (Brad Wright) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 15:10:33 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? In-Reply-To: <200910121420.n9CEKb2U002558@omr8.networksolutionsemail.com> References: <200910121420.n9CEKb2U002558@omr8.networksolutionsemail.com> Message-ID: <3A117F0D50887C4EAA3B35717ADE209914F032F2@BL2PRD0102MB015.prod.exchangelabs.com> I was talking to some folks from the UK that launch from a pier and recover at sea. They used to just let the alt die for each flight - yes you heard me right, 1 alt 1 flight. Then they built a bay that would close and seal before hitting the water so they can reuse the electronics over and over. b -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 7:21 AM To: Christopher Guenther; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? Potting electronics in epoxy is pretty common, but I haven't ever seen a solid block like you describr. I have always wanted to do a hardened ebay of some sort. Possibly designed to shear loose on ground impact and icorporating energy disipating crush zones. But probably won't get around to it. -----Original Message----- From: Christopher Guenther Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 10:44 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Christopher Guenther Date: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:38 PM Subject: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? To: Robert Krausert I will bet that has your eyebrows reaching for the sky and your right hand scratchn your head. While your left hand is feeling if you still have a hart beat. Have you ever seen that bouncy ball they make for kids. You know the one that has a circuit board and LED's in it. It lights up when is senses a significant impact. What if you made your electronics bay and had all your wiring done then filled it with that material. Of course you would have to delicately drill holes in the material in strategic areas. But if all else fails and you get a lawn dart at least the electronics bay wont be destroyed. Although you may end up chasing it for miles as it bounces on down the field... What do you think? Chris Guenther _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From melamy at earthlink.net Mon Oct 12 08:17:15 2009 From: melamy at earthlink.net (melamy at earthlink.net) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:17:15 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? Message-ID: <14537107.1255360635919.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> First off, make your ebay in a coupler tube that can be fit an any rocket. You would have to pour in a flexible potting material and isolate the barometric sensor from the potting material. You would also have to isolate the battery compartment and whatever is needed to be accessible. You would be better off turning a wood, delrin, or metal rod to fit in a tube and then mill out areas for mounting and access. Make pyro posts on each end for dual deployment. Threaded areas along the rod give you mounting for the ebay into a tube. Keep in mind that the shock of lawn darting will exceed manufacturers shock specifications for accelerometers and more than likely the flexible parts of barometric sensors. Protecting them from landing damage may do no good because of the "landing: stresses. You would be better off making sure that your electronics design and mechanical design will not have any failure points. best regards, Steve Thatcher -----Original Message----- >From: "Schurke, Peter" >Sent: Oct 12, 2009 6:45 AM >To: Christopher Guenther , rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? > >Intriguing idea, but how do you change the batteries, reprogram the altimeter, etc...? > >Casting your avionics in superball material would also render any barometric sensors somewhat less than functional (read as: inoperable). > >Last thing I can think of is that you'd essentially only be able to use that altimeter in rockets of a given diameter. Forget using one altimeter in three or four different sized rockets...your bay only fits in one. > >Casting the whole bay definitely wouldn't work, but there's plenty of ways to cushion the bay. Keep thinkin' and keep coming up with ideas. > >Peter Schurke >Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >Ingraham High School >1819 N 135th St. >Seattle, WA 98133 > >________________________________ > >From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Christopher Guenther >Sent: Sun 10/11/2009 10:44 PM >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? > > > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >From: Christopher Guenther >Date: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:38 PM >Subject: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? >To: Robert Krausert > > >I will bet that has your eyebrows reaching for the sky and your right hand >scratchn your head. While your left hand is feeling if you still have a >hart beat. > >Have you ever seen that bouncy ball they make for kids. You know the one >that has a circuit board and LED's in it. It lights up when is senses a >significant impact. What if you made your electronics bay and had all your >wiring done then filled it with that material. Of course you would have to >delicately drill holes in the material in strategic areas. But if all else >fails and you get a lawn dart at least the electronics bay wont be >destroyed. Although you may end up chasing it for miles as it bounces on >down the field... > >What do you think? > >Chris Guenther >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From Mfreptiles at aol.com Mon Oct 12 09:19:46 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:19:46 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? Message-ID: Chris, With accelerometer based altimeters like I use, I would not get accurate integration of acceleration, possibly resulting in the chute coming out at the wrong time, and at the very least bad data. With accelerometer based altimeters, it is important to have the altimeter hard coupled to the rocket in order to get proper operation/data. If you were flying baro only your idea would be fine. You have much to learn grasshopper. :) Mike In a message dated 10/11/2009 10:45:52 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, guentherchristopher at gmail.com writes: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Christopher Guenther Date: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:38 PM Subject: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? To: Robert Krausert I will bet that has your eyebrows reaching for the sky and your right hand scratchn your head. While your left hand is feeling if you still have a hart beat. Have you ever seen that bouncy ball they make for kids. You know the one that has a circuit board and LED's in it. It lights up when is senses a significant impact. What if you made your electronics bay and had all your wiring done then filled it with that material. Of course you would have to delicately drill holes in the material in strategic areas. But if all else fails and you get a lawn dart at least the electronics bay wont be destroyed. Although you may end up chasing it for miles as it bounces on down the field... What do you think? Chris Guenther _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 09:22:15 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:22:15 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? In-Reply-To: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B3002DB@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> References: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B3002DB@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> Message-ID: Why would the electronics be rendered inoperable? If your drilling air holes in the proper locations within the super ball material for the part that specifically need air or that you need to accessed. I was also thinking about doing each electronic component separately. That way you could use them in almost any diameter. Also if you only intend to fly 3" diameter or larger why not build a 3" ebay filled with the super ball material and agin have air/access hole drilled where they are needed to ensure the electronics will still function and be accessible? Then you could make yourself mounting adapters for any size larger then the 3". On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:45 AM, Schurke, Peter < pmschurke at seattleschools.org> wrote: > Intriguing idea, but how do you change the batteries, reprogram the > altimeter, etc...? > > Casting your avionics in superball material would also render any > barometric sensors somewhat less than functional (read as: inoperable). > > Last thing I can think of is that you'd essentially only be able to use > that altimeter in rockets of a given diameter. Forget using one altimeter > in three or four different sized rockets...your bay only fits in one. > > Casting the whole bay definitely wouldn't work, but there's plenty of ways > to cushion the bay. Keep thinkin' and keep coming up with ideas. > > Peter Schurke > Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor > Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy > Ingraham High School > 1819 N 135th St. > Seattle, WA 98133 > > ________________________________ > > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Christopher Guenther > Sent: Sun 10/11/2009 10:44 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Christopher Guenther > Date: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:38 PM > Subject: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? > To: Robert Krausert > > > I will bet that has your eyebrows reaching for the sky and your right hand > scratchn your head. While your left hand is feeling if you still have a > hart beat. > > Have you ever seen that bouncy ball they make for kids. You know the one > that has a circuit board and LED's in it. It lights up when is senses a > significant impact. What if you made your electronics bay and had all your > wiring done then filled it with that material. Of course you would have to > delicately drill holes in the material in strategic areas. But if all else > fails and you get a lawn dart at least the electronics bay wont be > destroyed. Although you may end up chasing it for miles as it bounces on > down the field... > > What do you think? > > Chris Guenther > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > From sb at berfield.com Mon Oct 12 09:34:42 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:34:42 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? Message-ID: Using soft material would also make accelerometers inaccurate since the give int eh material would cause the accelerometer to be moving independently of the rocket frame. That would have the potential to be bad. -----Original Message----- From: Christopher Guenther [mailto:guentherchristopher at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 09:22 AM To: 'Schurke, Peter' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? Why would the electronics be rendered inoperable? If your drilling airholes in the proper locations within the super ball material for the partthat specifically need air or that you need to accessed. I was alsothinking about doing each electronic component separately. That way youcould use them in almost any diameter. Also if you only intend to fly 3"diameter or larger why not build a 3" ebay filled with the super ballmaterial and agin have air/access hole drilled where they are needed toensure the electronics will still function and be accessible? Then youcould make yourself mounting adapters for any size larger then the 3".On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:45 AM, Schurke, Peter wrote:> Intriguing idea, but how do you change the batteries, reprogram the> altimeter, etc...?>> Casting your avionics in superball material would also render any> barometric sensors somewhat less than functional (read as: inoperable).>> Last thing I can think of is that you'd essentially only be able to use> that altimeter in rockets of a given diameter. Forget using one altimeter> in three or four different sized rockets...your bay only fits in one.>> Casting the whole bay definitely wouldn't work, but there's plenty of ways> to cushion the bay. Keep thinkin' and keep coming up with ideas.>> Peter Schurke> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy> Ingraham High School> 1819 N 135th St.> Seattle, WA 98133>> ________________________________>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Christopher Guenther> Sent: Sun 10/11/2009 10:44 PM> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com> Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay?>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------> From: Christopher Guenther > Date: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:38 PM> Subject: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay?> To: Robert Krausert >>> I will bet that has your eyebrows reaching for the sky and your right hand> scratchn your head. While your left hand is feeling if you still have a> hart beat.>> Have you ever seen that bouncy ball they make for kids. You know the one> that has a circuit board and LED's in it. It lights up when is senses a> significant impact. What if you made your electronics bay and had all your> wiring done then filled it with that material. Of course you would have to> delicately drill holes in the material in strategic areas. But if all else> fails and you get a lawn dart at least the electronics bay wont be> destroyed. Although you may end up chasing it for miles as it bounces on> down the field...>> What do you think?>> Chris Guenther> _______________________________________________> Rockets mailing list> Rockets at rocketsnw.com> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>>>_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From pmschurke at seattleschools.org Mon Oct 12 09:34:58 2009 From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org (Schurke, Peter) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:34:58 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? In-Reply-To: References: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B3002DB@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> Message-ID: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10942DB7A@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> in order to cushion as I interpreted/envisioned the description in your original post, you would have to cast the material with the altimeter in place. Covering the barometer would render it moot, but could be remedied as you describe. On the other hand, flow of any material >>into<< the baro sensor would permanently disable it. No amount of drilling would help you at that point. If you were envisioning a different process, or had already thought about that contingency, then I misinterpreted your original post. Sorry 'bout that. True, you could always adapt up, but you can never adapt down...so you'd have to build it in the absolute smallest coupler size you'd ever intend to use it with, then custom build your adapters. Mike F already posted a reply about the effect on acelerometers, which I hadn't even thought of yet. Meant to be encouraging, but bring up potential sticking points to think through...not trying to be a killjoy (I have students to do that to...) Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St Seattle, WA 98133 ________________________________ From: Christopher Guenther [mailto:guentherchristopher at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:22 AM To: Schurke, Peter Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? Why would the electronics be rendered inoperable? If your drilling air holes in the proper locations within the super ball material for the part that specifically need air or that you need to accessed. I was also thinking about doing each electronic component separately. That way you could use them in almost any diameter. Also if you only intend to fly 3" diameter or larger why not build a 3" ebay filled with the super ball material and agin have air/access hole drilled where they are needed to ensure the electronics will still function and be accessible? Then you could make yourself mounting adapters for any size larger then the 3". On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:45 AM, Schurke, Peter wrote: Intriguing idea, but how do you change the batteries, reprogram the altimeter, etc...? Casting your avionics in superball material would also render any barometric sensors somewhat less than functional (read as: inoperable). Last thing I can think of is that you'd essentially only be able to use that altimeter in rockets of a given diameter. Forget using one altimeter in three or four different sized rockets...your bay only fits in one. Casting the whole bay definitely wouldn't work, but there's plenty of ways to cushion the bay. Keep thinkin' and keep coming up with ideas. Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St. Seattle, WA 98133 ________________________________ From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Christopher Guenther Sent: Sun 10/11/2009 10:44 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Christopher Guenther Date: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:38 PM Subject: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? To: Robert Krausert I will bet that has your eyebrows reaching for the sky and your right hand scratchn your head. While your left hand is feeling if you still have a hart beat. Have you ever seen that bouncy ball they make for kids. You know the one that has a circuit board and LED's in it. It lights up when is senses a significant impact. What if you made your electronics bay and had all your wiring done then filled it with that material. Of course you would have to delicately drill holes in the material in strategic areas. But if all else fails and you get a lawn dart at least the electronics bay wont be destroyed. Although you may end up chasing it for miles as it bounces on down the field... What do you think? Chris Guenther _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Mon Oct 12 09:35:39 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:35:39 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? Message-ID: I've had launches like that.... :( -----Original Message----- From: Brad Wright [mailto:bradwr at wrightholdings.com] Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 08:10 AM To: 'Scott Berfield', 'Christopher Guenther', rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? I was talking to some folks from the UK that launch from a pier and recover at sea. They used to just let the alt die for each flight - yes you heard me right, 1 alt 1 flight. Then they built a bay that would close and seal before hitting the water so they can reuse the electronics over and over.b-----Original Message-----From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott BerfieldSent: Monday, October 12, 2009 7:21 AMTo: Christopher Guenther; rockets at rocketsnw.comSubject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay?Potting electronics in epoxy is pretty common, but I haven't ever seen a solid block like you describr.I have always wanted to do a hardened ebay of some sort. Possibly designed to shear loose on ground impact and icorporating energy disipating crush zones.But probably won't get around to it.-----Original Message-----From: Christopher Guenther Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 10:44 PMTo: rockets at rocketsnw.comSubject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay?---------- Forwarded message ----------From: Christopher Guenther Date: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:38 PMSubject: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay?To: Robert Krausert I will bet that has your eyebrows reaching for the sky and your right handscratchn your head. While your left hand is feeling if you still have ahart beat.Have you ever seen that bouncy ball they make for kids. You know the onethat has a circuit board and LED's in it. It lights up when is senses asignificant impact. What if you made your electronics bay and had all yourwiring done then filled it with that material. Of course you would have todelicately drill holes in the material in strategic areas. But if all elsefails and you get a lawn dart at least the electronics bay wont bedestroyed. Although you may end up chasing it for miles as it bounces ondown the field...What do you think?Chris Guenther_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 09:45:02 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:45:02 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? In-Reply-To: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10942DB7A@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> References: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B3002DB@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10942DB7A@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> Message-ID: I had not thought about that and thank you for pointing it out. In that case vacuum seal the electronics prior to casting then when you drill your air/access holes and gently pop through the vacuum material there would not have been fluid entering critical parts. You could just seal the sensor and go that route as well. As for an accelerometer if your mounting bolts still hard mount to the ebay would it not still function the same? I am not taking about having the electronics free floating in the material but still mounted the same way you would normally then do the casting. On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Schurke, Peter < pmschurke at seattleschools.org> wrote: > in order to cushion as I interpreted/envisioned the description in your > original post, you would have to cast the material with the altimeter in > place. Covering the barometer would render it moot, but could be remedied > as you describe. On the other hand, flow of any material >>into<< the baro > sensor would permanently disable it. No amount of drilling would help you > at that point. > > If you were envisioning a different process, or had already thought about > that contingency, then I misinterpreted your original post. Sorry 'bout > that. > > True, you could always adapt up, but you can never adapt down...so you'd > have to build it in the absolute smallest coupler size you'd ever intend to > use it with, then custom build your adapters. > > Mike F already posted a reply about the effect on acelerometers, which I > hadn't even thought of yet. > > Meant to be encouraging, but bring up potential sticking points to think > through...not trying to be a killjoy (I have students to do that to...) > > Peter Schurke > Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor > Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy > Ingraham High School > 1819 N 135th St > Seattle, WA 98133 > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Christopher Guenther [mailto:guentherchristopher at gmail.com] > *Sent:* Monday, October 12, 2009 9:22 AM > *To:* Schurke, Peter > *Cc:* rockets at rocketsnw.com > *Subject:* Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof > electronics bay? > > Why would the electronics be rendered inoperable? If your drilling air > holes in the proper locations within the super ball material for the part > that specifically need air or that you need to accessed. I was also > thinking about doing each electronic component separately. That way you > could use them in almost any diameter. Also if you only intend to fly 3" > diameter or larger why not build a 3" ebay filled with the super ball > material and agin have air/access hole drilled where they are needed to > ensure the electronics will still function and be accessible? Then you > could make yourself mounting adapters for any size larger then the 3". > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:45 AM, Schurke, Peter < > pmschurke at seattleschools.org> wrote: > >> Intriguing idea, but how do you change the batteries, reprogram the >> altimeter, etc...? >> >> Casting your avionics in superball material would also render any >> barometric sensors somewhat less than functional (read as: inoperable). >> >> Last thing I can think of is that you'd essentially only be able to use >> that altimeter in rockets of a given diameter. Forget using one altimeter >> in three or four different sized rockets...your bay only fits in one. >> >> Casting the whole bay definitely wouldn't work, but there's plenty of ways >> to cushion the bay. Keep thinkin' and keep coming up with ideas. >> >> Peter Schurke >> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >> Ingraham High School >> 1819 N 135th St. >> Seattle, WA 98133 >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Christopher Guenther >> Sent: Sun 10/11/2009 10:44 PM >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Christopher Guenther >> Date: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:38 PM >> Subject: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? >> To: Robert Krausert >> >> >> I will bet that has your eyebrows reaching for the sky and your right hand >> scratchn your head. While your left hand is feeling if you still have a >> hart beat. >> >> Have you ever seen that bouncy ball they make for kids. You know the one >> that has a circuit board and LED's in it. It lights up when is senses a >> significant impact. What if you made your electronics bay and had all >> your >> wiring done then filled it with that material. Of course you would have >> to >> delicately drill holes in the material in strategic areas. But if all >> else >> fails and you get a lawn dart at least the electronics bay wont be >> destroyed. Although you may end up chasing it for miles as it bounces on >> down the field... >> >> What do you think? >> >> Chris Guenther >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> > From glech at aol.com Mon Oct 12 09:50:46 2009 From: glech at aol.com (Gary Lech) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:50:46 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather References: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: Hi folks, I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be cancelled at the last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling required to fly? Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd and enjoy the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to getting rid of me for a few days. Cheers from new guy ~ Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 ) ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Krausert To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. Weather forecast is: Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank you sir. Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast out there for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive changes in rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Krausert To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket Launch Event October 16th - 18th 2009 OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to announce our Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th through 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join us for a very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific Northwest. You are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry begins with OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for OregonRocketry. We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are one. This launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining flights. October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are welcome to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with TRA research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are allowed to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, and invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the prep area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets on Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor days. Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do not need to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, and spend some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday and 8:00am to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need something on your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in the dark. But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those glow sticks taped to rockets can work. The onsite FSO will need to make sure everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before committing. They may have ideas. This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have some ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During the day and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or treat you to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep them at bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a long day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the center one, located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. Also, consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like devices at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the community fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's up to them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety code. As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit the OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and TRA websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to comprehend and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be reviewed by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If you are bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about stability, center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and complex rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the public. We certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of fun. We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA clearance to 25,000 feet above sea level (or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules are 75% of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or 15,375 feet AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high enough to keep everyone happy. Directions: We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers launch site. At this web URL, there are two directions. http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create any more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. The firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have a fire Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk and good times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some firewood. We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally get to watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us have been out there till 3am and later. New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch site, and has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to be prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, sunburns can happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And sun-screen, sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site to learn more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we expect to have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to the site. http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running of the event. Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare you and your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or hot, water is so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group healthy. Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to have one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day and that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at 9:30am Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th through 18th. Cheers, Robert OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From robert.krausert at intel.com Mon Oct 12 09:59:29 2009 From: robert.krausert at intel.com (Krausert, Robert) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:59:29 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: References: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D110@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Sir, We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The weather outlook has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday still has 40% chance of precip. Cheers, Robert -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Gary Lech Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather Hi folks, I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be cancelled at the last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling required to fly? Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd and enjoy the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to getting rid of me for a few days. Cheers from new guy ~ Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 ) ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Krausert To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. Weather forecast is: Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank you sir. Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast out there for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive changes in rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Krausert To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket Launch Event October 16th - 18th 2009 OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to announce our Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th through 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join us for a very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific Northwest. You are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry begins with OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for OregonRocketry. We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are one. This launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining flights. October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are welcome to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with TRA research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are allowed to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, and invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the prep area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets on Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor days. Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do not need to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, and spend some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday and 8:00am to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need something on your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in the dark. But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those glow sticks taped to rockets can work. The onsite FSO will need to make sure everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before committing. They may have ideas. This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have some ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During the day and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or treat you to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep them at bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a long day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the center one, located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. Also, consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like devices at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the community fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's up to them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety code. As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit the OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and TRA websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to comprehend and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be reviewed by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If you are bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about stability, center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and complex rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the public. We certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of fun. We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA clearance to 25,000 feet above sea level (or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules are 75% of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or 15,375 feet AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high enough to keep everyone happy. Directions: We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers launch site. At this web URL, there are two directions. http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create any more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. The firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have a fire Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk and good times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some firewood. We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally get to watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us have been out there till 3am and later. New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch site, and has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to be prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, sunburns can happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And sun-screen, sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site to learn more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we expect to have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to the site. http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running of the event. Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare you and your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or hot, water is so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group healthy. Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to have one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day and that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at 9:30am Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th through 18th. Cheers, Robert OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Mfreptiles at aol.com Mon Oct 12 10:02:13 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:02:13 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? Message-ID: Then you are talking about the common practice of potting except for using a rubber medium instead of a more rigid epoxy. You'd be better off conformal coating the electronics and save the weight. Mike F. In a message dated 10/12/2009 9:45:48 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, guentherchristopher at gmail.com writes: I am not taking about having the electronics free floating in the material but still mounted the same way you would normally then do the casting. From glech at aol.com Mon Oct 12 10:16:07 2009 From: glech at aol.com (Gary Lech) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:16:07 -0400 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D110@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D110@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: <8CC1976D243BD44-5298-A261@webmail-m090.sysops.aol.com> Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is bad. Cheers, Gary -----Original Message----- From: Krausert, Robert To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather Sir, We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The weather outlook has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday still has 40% chance of precip. Cheers, Robert -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Gary Lech Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather Hi folks, I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be cancelled at the last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling required to fly? Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd and enjoy the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to getting rid of me for a few days. Cheers from new guy ~ Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 ) ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Krausert To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. Weather forecast is: Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank you sir. Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast out there for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive changes in rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Krausert To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th 2009 OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to announce our Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th through 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join us for a very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific Northwest. You are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry begins with OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for OregonRocketry. We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are one. This launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining flights. October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are welcome to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with TRA research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are allowed to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, and invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the prep area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets on Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor days. Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do not need to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, and spend some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday and 8:00am to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need something on your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in the dark. But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those glow sticks taped to rockets can work. The o nsite FSO will need to make sure everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before committing. They may have ideas. This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have some ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During the day and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or treat you to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep them at bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a long day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the center one, located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. Also, consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like devices at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the community fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's up to them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety code. As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit the OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and TRA websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to comprehend and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be reviewed by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If you are bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about stability, center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and complex rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the public. We certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of fun. We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA clearance to 25,000 feet above sea level ( or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules are 75% of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or 15,375 feet AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high enough to keep everyone happy. Directions: We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers launch site. At this web URL, there are two directions. http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create any more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. The firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have a fire Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk and good times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some firewood. We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally get to watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us have been out there till 3am and later. New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch site, and has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to be prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, sunburns can happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And sun-screen, sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site to learn more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we expect to have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to the site. http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running of the event. Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare you and your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or hot, water is so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group healthy. Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to have one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day and that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at 9:30am Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th through 18th. Cheers, Robert OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From jhadv at pacifier.com Mon Oct 12 10:20:00 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (Paul Bogdanich) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 10:20:00 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20091012100954.00c2b728@mail.iinet.com> Furthermore, if the altimeter rotates even the slightest bit during flight you loose your axial orientation and the accelerometer returns bogus apogee and altitude calculations. Also not that it is something I am proud of, but having burned in three rockets (from above 5,000 feet each time one from above 8,000) I tried aluminum housings on the last two and the altimeter started surviving the crashes. Sort of. It survived enough to get the data off of it and do a forensic examination, which is how the high Rds On was discovered. That said, one would be a ill advised to use it again for flight. Who knows to what degree the surface mounted components were loosened and the degree to which the baro unit and accelerometer chip were torqued out of spec and using it again would be asking for trouble. On the last burn in calculated peak Gs on impact were around 8,500. Ooops. I would also point out that the critical part of the whole exercise was having the walston transmitter in the same housing as the altimeter. Without that transmitter there would be almost no way to find the remains. I suppose breakable capsules containing skunk extract and a good bloodhound would get you close but that's a little to novel for my particular tastes. From greg at bigredbee.com Mon Oct 12 10:25:26 2009 From: greg at bigredbee.com (Greg Clark) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 10:25:26 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: <8CC1976D243BD44-5298-A261@webmail-m090.sysops.aol.com> References: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D110@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> <8CC1976D243BD44-5298-A261@webmail-m090.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: We won't cancel the launch, but if the weather's bad, there might not be too much going UP! On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: > > Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! > > > > I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is bad. > > > > Cheers, > > Gary > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Krausert, Robert > To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > > > Sir, > We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. > > Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The weather outlook > has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday still has > 40% chance of precip. > > Cheers, > Robert > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On > Behalf Of Gary Lech > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > Hi folks, > I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be cancelled at the > last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling required to > fly? > > Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd and enjoy > the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to getting rid > of me for a few days. > > Cheers from new guy ~ > Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 > ) > > > ?----- Original Message ----- > ?From: Robert Krausert > ?To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org > ?Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM > ?Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket > LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 > > > ?We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. > > ?Weather forecast is: > ?Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers > ?Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers > ?Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds > ?Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. > > ?Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank you sir. > > ?Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast out there > for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive changes in > rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. > > ?Cheers, > ?Robert > > ?----- Original Message ----- > ?From: Robert Krausert > ?To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > ?Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM > ?Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc > ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th > 2009 > > > ?OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - > ROCKETOBER - > > ?As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to announce our > Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th through > 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join us for a > very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific Northwest. You > are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. > > ?Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry begins with > OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for OregonRocketry. > We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are one. This > launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining flights. > > ?October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are welcome > to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with TRA > research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are allowed > to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, and > invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the prep > area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets on > Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. > > ?Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor days. > Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do not need > to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, and spend > some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday and 8:00am > to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need something on > your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! > > ?Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in the dark. > But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those glow > sticks taped to rockets can work. The o > nsite FSO will need to make sure > everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before > committing. They may have ideas. > > ?This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have some > ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During the day > and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or treat you > to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep them at > bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to > contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a long > day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the center one, > located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. Also, > consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like devices > at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the community > fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's up to > them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. > > ?The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety code. > As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit the > OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and TRA > websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to comprehend > and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be reviewed > by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If you are > bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about stability, > center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and complex > rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. > > ?Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the public. We > certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of fun. > > ?We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA clearance to > 25,000 feet above sea level ( > or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have > a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules are 75% > of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or 15,375 feet > AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high enough > to keep everyone happy. > > ?Directions: > ?We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers launch > site. At this web URL, there are two directions. > ?http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm > > ?We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create any > more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. The > firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have a fire > Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk and good > times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some firewood. > We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally get to > watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us have been > out there till 3am and later. > > ?New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch site, and > has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to be > prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, sunburns can > happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And sun-screen, > sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties > available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site to learn > more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we expect to > have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to the site. > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm > > ?We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running of the > event. > > ?Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare you and > your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or hot, > water is > ?so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you > bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group healthy. > > ?Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to have > one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day and > that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. > > ?Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at 9:30am > Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th through 18th. > > ?Cheers, > ?Robert > > ?OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - > ROCKETOBER > ?_______________________________________________ > ?Rockets mailing list > ?Rockets at rocketsnw.com > ?http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 10:53:08 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 10:53:08 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: <8CC1976D243BD44-5298-A261@webmail-m090.sysops.aol.com> References: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D110@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> <8CC1976D243BD44-5298-A261@webmail-m090.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: I would am going no matter what myself. I was given the L2 written yesterday by Steve Tarr and passed with 37 out of 37. So I am ramped and ready to launch my L2 cert. I do not see anything that would keep me from going at this point. If I break down on the way I will call my dad in eastern Washington and have him start relaying the message for help over the Ham radio. Maybe someone from the launch will pass by or hear the call and come to the rescue. If all goes well my L2 should apogee between 5000 and 5300 feet depending on the wind. I am also bringing a couple of naked body tubes and another 38mm rocket I just finished building as a back up contingency. I am finding that I do not like the fragility of PML's phenolic tubing. After Rocketober I will start glassing all PML tubing or just using them for layup molds. I have a 5" piece of 3.9 pml that rolled off the table and landed on it side. That side is now weak and has been tossed in the trash. On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: > > Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! > > > > I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is bad. > > > > Cheers, > > Gary > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Krausert, Robert > To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com < > rockets at rocketsnw.com> > Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > > > Sir, > We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. > > Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The weather > outlook > has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday still > has > 40% chance of precip. > > Cheers, > Robert > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On > Behalf Of Gary Lech > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > Hi folks, > I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be cancelled > at the > last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling required > to > fly? > > Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd and > enjoy > the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to getting > rid > of me for a few days. > > Cheers from new guy ~ > Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( > http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 > ) > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Robert Krausert > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM > Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket > LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 > > > We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. > > Weather forecast is: > Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers > Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers > Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds > Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. > > Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank you > sir. > > Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast out > there > for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive changes > in > rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. > > Cheers, > Robert > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Robert Krausert > To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM > Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc > ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th > 2009 > > > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY > - > ROCKETOBER - > > As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to announce > our > Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th > through > 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join us > for a > very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific Northwest. > You > are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. > > Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry begins > with > OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for > OregonRocketry. > We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are one. > This > launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining > flights. > > October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are > welcome > to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with > TRA > research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are > allowed > to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, > and > invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the > prep > area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets on > Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. > > Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor days. > Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do not > need > to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, and > spend > some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday and > 8:00am > to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need something > on > your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! > > Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in the > dark. > But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those > glow > sticks taped to rockets can work. The o > nsite FSO will need to make sure > everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before > committing. They may have ideas. > > This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have some > ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During the > day > and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or treat > you > to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep them > at > bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to > contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a > long > day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the center > one, > located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. > Also, > consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like > devices > at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the > community > fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's up > to > them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. > > The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety > code. > As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit > the > OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and > TRA > websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to > comprehend > and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be > reviewed > by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If > you are > bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about > stability, > center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and > complex > rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. > > Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the public. > We > certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of > fun. > > We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA clearance > to > 25,000 feet above sea level ( > or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have > a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules > are 75% > of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or 15,375 > feet > AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high > enough > to keep everyone happy. > > Directions: > We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers > launch > site. At this web URL, there are two directions. > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm > > We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create any > more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. The > firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have a > fire > Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk and > good > times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some > firewood. > We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally > get to > watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us have > been > out there till 3am and later. > > New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch site, > and > has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to be > prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, sunburns > can > happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And > sun-screen, > sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties > available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site to > learn > more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we expect > to > have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to the > site. > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm > > We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running of > the > event. > > Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare you > and > your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or > hot, > water is > so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you > bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group > healthy. > > Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to > have > one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day > and > that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. > > Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at 9:30am > Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th through > 18th. > > Cheers, > Robert > > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY > - > ROCKETOBER > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From glech at aol.com Mon Oct 12 12:20:26 2009 From: glech at aol.com (Gary Lech) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:20:26 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather References: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D110@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> <8CC1976D243BD44-5298-A261@webmail-m090.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: That'll make 2 of us then. Hopefully, the cloud ceiling will be above 5300 ft AGL (9800 ft MSL at Brothers). My L1 cert rocket sims at 2800 ft. Perhaps we'll get some openings in the clouds for our flights. I'm planning to bring the low power fleet too so we can still have some flying fun no matter what. Cheers from ~ Gary ----- Original Message ----- From: Christopher Guenther To: Gary Lech Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:53 AM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather I would am going no matter what myself. I was given the L2 written yesterday by Steve Tarr and passed with 37 out of 37. So I am ramped and ready to launch my L2 cert. I do not see anything that would keep me from going at this point. If I break down on the way I will call my dad in eastern Washington and have him start relaying the message for help over the Ham radio. Maybe someone from the launch will pass by or hear the call and come to the rescue. If all goes well my L2 should apogee between 5000 and 5300 feet depending on the wind. I am also bringing a couple of naked body tubes and another 38mm rocket I just finished building as a back up contingency. I am finding that I do not like the fragility of PML's phenolic tubing. After Rocketober I will start glassing all PML tubing or just using them for layup molds. I have a 5" piece of 3.9 pml that rolled off the table and landed on it side. That side is now weak and has been tossed in the trash. On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is bad. Cheers, Gary -----Original Message----- From: Krausert, Robert To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather Sir, We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The weather outlook has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday still has 40% chance of precip. Cheers, Robert -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Gary Lech Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather Hi folks, I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be cancelled at the last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling required to fly? Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd and enjoy the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to getting rid of me for a few days. Cheers from new guy ~ Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 ) ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Krausert To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. Weather forecast is: Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank you sir. Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast out there for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive changes in rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Krausert To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th 2009 OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to announce our Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th through 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join us for a very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific Northwest. You are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry begins with OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for OregonRocketry. We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are one. This launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining flights. October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are welcome to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with TRA research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are allowed to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, and invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the prep area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets on Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor days. Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do not need to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, and spend some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday and 8:00am to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need something on your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in the dark. But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those glow sticks taped to rockets can work. The o nsite FSO will need to make sure everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before committing. They may have ideas. This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have some ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During the day and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or treat you to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep them at bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a long day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the center one, located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. Also, consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like devices at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the community fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's up to them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety code. As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit the OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and TRA websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to comprehend and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be reviewed by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If you are bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about stability, center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and complex rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the public. We certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of fun. We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA clearance to 25,000 feet above sea level ( or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules are 75% of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or 15,375 feet AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high enough to keep everyone happy. Directions: We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers launch site. At this web URL, there are two directions. http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create any more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. The firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have a fire Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk and good times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some firewood. We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally get to watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us have been out there till 3am and later. New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch site, and has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to be prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, sunburns can happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And sun-screen, sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site to learn more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we expect to have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to the site. http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running of the event. Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare you and your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or hot, water is so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group healthy. Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to have one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day and that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at 9:30am Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th through 18th. Cheers, Robert OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 12:27:34 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:27:34 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: References: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D110@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> <8CC1976D243BD44-5298-A261@webmail-m090.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: I will bring a bunch of C6-7's I do not have a LPR to use them in so anyone is welcome to them. On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Gary Lech wrote: > That'll make 2 of us then. Hopefully, the cloud ceiling will be above 5300 > ft AGL (9800 ft MSL at Brothers). My L1 cert rocket sims at 2800 ft. Perhaps > we'll get some openings in the clouds for our flights. I'm planning to bring > the low power fleet too so we can still have some flying fun no matter what. > Cheers from ~ > Gary > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Christopher Guenther > To: Gary Lech > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:53 AM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > I would am going no matter what myself. I was given the L2 written > yesterday by Steve Tarr and passed with 37 out of 37. So I am ramped and > ready to launch my L2 cert. I do not see anything that would keep me from > going at this point. If I break down on the way I will call my dad in > eastern Washington and have him start relaying the message for help over the > Ham radio. Maybe someone from the launch will pass by or hear the call and > come to the rescue. If all goes well my L2 should apogee between 5000 and > 5300 feet depending on the wind. I am also bringing a couple of naked body > tubes and another 38mm rocket I just finished building as a back up > contingency. I am finding that I do not like the fragility of PML's > phenolic tubing. After Rocketober I will start glassing all PML tubing or > just using them for layup molds. I have a 5" piece of 3.9 pml that rolled > off the table and landed on it side. That side is now weak and has been > tossed in the trash. > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: > > > Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! > > > > I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is bad. > > > > Cheers, > > Gary > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Krausert, Robert > To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com < > rockets at rocketsnw.com> > Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > > > Sir, > We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. > > Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The weather > outlook > has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday > still has > 40% chance of precip. > > Cheers, > Robert > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: > rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On > Behalf Of Gary Lech > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > Hi folks, > I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be > cancelled at the > last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling > required to > fly? > > Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd and > enjoy > the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to > getting rid > of me for a few days. > > Cheers from new guy ~ > Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( > http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 > ) > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Robert Krausert > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM > Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket > LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 > > > We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. > > Weather forecast is: > Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers > Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers > Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds > Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. > > Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank > you sir. > > Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast out > there > for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive > changes in > rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. > > Cheers, > Robert > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Robert Krausert > To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM > Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc > ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th > 2009 > > > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > OREGONROCKETRY - > ROCKETOBER - > > As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to > announce our > Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th > through > 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join > us for a > very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific > Northwest. You > are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. > > Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry > begins with > OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for > OregonRocketry. > We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are > one. This > launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining > flights. > > October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are > welcome > to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with > TRA > research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are > allowed > to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, > and > invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the > prep > area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets > on > Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. > > Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor > days. > Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do > not need > to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, > and spend > some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday > and 8:00am > to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need > something on > your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! > > Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in > the dark. > But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those > glow > sticks taped to rockets can work. The o > nsite FSO will need to make sure > everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before > committing. They may have ideas. > > This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have > some > ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During > the day > and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or > treat you > to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep > them at > bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to > contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a > long > day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the > center one, > located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. > Also, > consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like > devices > at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the > community > fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's > up to > them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. > > The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety > code. > As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit > the > OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and > TRA > websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to > comprehend > and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be > reviewed > by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If > you are > bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about > stability, > center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and > complex > rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. > > Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the > public. We > certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of > fun. > > We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA > clearance to > 25,000 feet above sea level ( > or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have > a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules > are 75% > of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or > 15,375 feet > AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high > enough > to keep everyone happy. > > Directions: > We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers > launch > site. At this web URL, there are two directions. > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm > > We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create > any > more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. > The > firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have > a fire > Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk and > good > times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some > firewood. > We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally > get to > watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us > have been > out there till 3am and later. > > New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch > site, and > has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to > be > prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, > sunburns can > happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And > sun-screen, > sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties > available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site > to learn > more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we > expect to > have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to > the site. > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm > > We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running > of the > event. > > Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare > you and > your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or > hot, > water is > so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you > bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group > healthy. > > Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to > have > one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day > and > that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. > > Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at > 9:30am > Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th > through 18th. > > Cheers, > Robert > > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > OREGONROCKETRY - > ROCKETOBER > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From robert.krausert at intel.com Mon Oct 12 13:58:07 2009 From: robert.krausert at intel.com (Krausert, Robert) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:58:07 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: References: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D110@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> <8CC1976D243BD44-5298-A261@webmail-m090.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D4F4@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Now Chris... You know we all mean the best. We try so hard not to critisize, and simply offer advise. You're ready for what appears a J570 L2 certification flight. But now you're also talking about C6 motors. You might want to rethink that, maybe a bit aggressive. Just make sure the airframe can handle the thrust curve of that C. LOL. Cheers, Robert -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 12:28 PM To: Gary Lech Cc: NWRocketry List Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather I will bring a bunch of C6-7's I do not have a LPR to use them in so anyone is welcome to them. On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Gary Lech wrote: > That'll make 2 of us then. Hopefully, the cloud ceiling will be above 5300 > ft AGL (9800 ft MSL at Brothers). My L1 cert rocket sims at 2800 ft. Perhaps > we'll get some openings in the clouds for our flights. I'm planning to bring > the low power fleet too so we can still have some flying fun no matter what. > Cheers from ~ > Gary > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Christopher Guenther > To: Gary Lech > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:53 AM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > I would am going no matter what myself. I was given the L2 written > yesterday by Steve Tarr and passed with 37 out of 37. So I am ramped and > ready to launch my L2 cert. I do not see anything that would keep me from > going at this point. If I break down on the way I will call my dad in > eastern Washington and have him start relaying the message for help over the > Ham radio. Maybe someone from the launch will pass by or hear the call and > come to the rescue. If all goes well my L2 should apogee between 5000 and > 5300 feet depending on the wind. I am also bringing a couple of naked body > tubes and another 38mm rocket I just finished building as a back up > contingency. I am finding that I do not like the fragility of PML's > phenolic tubing. After Rocketober I will start glassing all PML tubing or > just using them for layup molds. I have a 5" piece of 3.9 pml that rolled > off the table and landed on it side. That side is now weak and has been > tossed in the trash. > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: > > > Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! > > > > I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is bad. > > > > Cheers, > > Gary > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Krausert, Robert > To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com < > rockets at rocketsnw.com> > Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > > > Sir, > We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. > > Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The weather > outlook > has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday > still has > 40% chance of precip. > > Cheers, > Robert > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: > rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On > Behalf Of Gary Lech > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > Hi folks, > I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be > cancelled at the > last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling > required to > fly? > > Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd and > enjoy > the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to > getting rid > of me for a few days. > > Cheers from new guy ~ > Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( > http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 > ) > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Robert Krausert > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM > Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket > LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 > > > We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. > > Weather forecast is: > Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers > Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers > Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds > Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. > > Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank > you sir. > > Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast out > there > for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive > changes in > rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. > > Cheers, > Robert > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Robert Krausert > To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM > Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc > ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th > 2009 > > > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > OREGONROCKETRY - > ROCKETOBER - > > As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to > announce our > Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th > through > 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join > us for a > very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific > Northwest. You > are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. > > Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry > begins with > OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for > OregonRocketry. > We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are > one. This > launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining > flights. > > October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are > welcome > to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with > TRA > research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are > allowed > to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, > and > invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the > prep > area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets > on > Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. > > Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor > days. > Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do > not need > to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, > and spend > some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday > and 8:00am > to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need > something on > your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! > > Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in > the dark. > But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those > glow > sticks taped to rockets can work. The o > nsite FSO will need to make sure > everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before > committing. They may have ideas. > > This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have > some > ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During > the day > and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or > treat you > to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep > them at > bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to > contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a > long > day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the > center one, > located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. > Also, > consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like > devices > at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the > community > fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's > up to > them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. > > The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety > code. > As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit > the > OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and > TRA > websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to > comprehend > and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be > reviewed > by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If > you are > bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about > stability, > center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and > complex > rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. > > Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the > public. We > certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of > fun. > > We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA > clearance to > 25,000 feet above sea level ( > or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have > a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules > are 75% > of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or > 15,375 feet > AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high > enough > to keep everyone happy. > > Directions: > We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers > launch > site. At this web URL, there are two directions. > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm > > We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create > any > more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. > The > firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have > a fire > Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk and > good > times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some > firewood. > We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally > get to > watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us > have been > out there till 3am and later. > > New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch > site, and > has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to > be > prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, > sunburns can > happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And > sun-screen, > sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties > available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site > to learn > more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we > expect to > have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to > the site. > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm > > We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running > of the > event. > > Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare > you and > your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or > hot, > water is > so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you > bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group > healthy. > > Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to > have > one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day > and > that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. > > Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at > 9:30am > Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th > through 18th. > > Cheers, > Robert > > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > OREGONROCKETRY - > ROCKETOBER > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 14:06:10 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:06:10 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D4F4@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D110@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> <8CC1976D243BD44-5298-A261@webmail-m090.sysops.aol.com> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D4F4@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: LMAO! On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Krausert, Robert wrote: > Now Chris... > > You know we all mean the best. We try so hard not to critisize, and simply > offer advise. You're ready for what appears a J570 L2 certification flight. > But now you're also talking about C6 motors. You might want to rethink that, > maybe a bit aggressive. Just make sure the airframe can handle the thrust > curve of that C. > > LOL. > > Cheers, > Robert > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 12:28 PM > To: Gary Lech > Cc: NWRocketry List > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > I will bring a bunch of C6-7's I do not have a LPR to use them in so > anyone > is welcome to them. > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Gary Lech wrote: > > > That'll make 2 of us then. Hopefully, the cloud ceiling will be above > 5300 > > ft AGL (9800 ft MSL at Brothers). My L1 cert rocket sims at 2800 ft. > Perhaps > > we'll get some openings in the clouds for our flights. I'm planning to > bring > > the low power fleet too so we can still have some flying fun no matter > what. > > Cheers from ~ > > Gary > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: Christopher Guenther > > To: Gary Lech > > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:53 AM > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > > > > I would am going no matter what myself. I was given the L2 written > > yesterday by Steve Tarr and passed with 37 out of 37. So I am ramped and > > ready to launch my L2 cert. I do not see anything that would keep me > from > > going at this point. If I break down on the way I will call my dad in > > eastern Washington and have him start relaying the message for help over > the > > Ham radio. Maybe someone from the launch will pass by or hear the call > and > > come to the rescue. If all goes well my L2 should apogee between 5000 > and > > 5300 feet depending on the wind. I am also bringing a couple of naked > body > > tubes and another 38mm rocket I just finished building as a back up > > contingency. I am finding that I do not like the fragility of PML's > > phenolic tubing. After Rocketober I will start glassing all PML tubing > or > > just using them for layup molds. I have a 5" piece of 3.9 pml that > rolled > > off the table and landed on it side. That side is now weak and has been > > tossed in the trash. > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: > > > > > > Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! > > > > > > > > I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is bad. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Gary > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Krausert, Robert > > To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com < > > rockets at rocketsnw.com> > > Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am > > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > > > > > > > > Sir, > > We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. > > > > Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The > weather > > outlook > > has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday > > still has > > 40% chance of precip. > > > > Cheers, > > Robert > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: > > rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On > > Behalf Of Gary Lech > > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM > > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > > Hi folks, > > I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be > > cancelled at the > > last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling > > required to > > fly? > > > > Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd > and > > enjoy > > the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to > > getting rid > > of me for a few days. > > > > Cheers from new guy ~ > > Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( > > > http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 > > ) > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Robert Krausert > > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org > > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM > > Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket > > LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 > > > > > > We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. > > > > Weather forecast is: > > Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers > > Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers > > Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds > > Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. > > > > Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank > > you sir. > > > > Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast > out > > there > > for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive > > changes in > > rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. > > > > Cheers, > > Robert > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Robert Krausert > > To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > > Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM > > Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc > > ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th > > 2009 > > > > > > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > > OREGONROCKETRY - > > ROCKETOBER - > > > > As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to > > announce our > > Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October > 16th > > through > > 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will > join > > us for a > > very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific > > Northwest. You > > are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. > > > > Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry > > begins with > > OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for > > OregonRocketry. > > We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are > > one. This > > launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining > > flights. > > > > October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are > > welcome > > to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance > with > > TRA > > research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, > are > > allowed > > to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under > 18, > > and > > invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in > the > > prep > > area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly > rockets > > on > > Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA > members. > > > > Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor > > days. > > Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do > > not need > > to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, > > and spend > > some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday > > and 8:00am > > to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need > > something on > > your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! > > > > Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in > > the dark. > > But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. > Those > > glow > > sticks taped to rockets can work. The o > > nsite FSO will need to make sure > > everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before > > committing. They may have ideas. > > > > This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have > > some > > ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During > > the day > > and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or > > treat you > > to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep > > them at > > bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood > to > > contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after > a > > long > > day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the > > center one, > > located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. > > Also, > > consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like > > devices > > at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the > > community > > fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, > that's > > up to > > them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. > > > > The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA > safety > > code. > > As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please > visit > > the > > OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR > and > > TRA > > websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to > > comprehend > > and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be > > reviewed > > by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. > If > > you are > > bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about > > stability, > > center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage > and > > complex > > rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. > > > > Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the > > public. We > > certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot > of > > fun. > > > > We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA > > clearance to > > 25,000 feet above sea level ( > > or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have > > a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA > rules > > are 75% > > of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or > > 15,375 feet > > AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be > high > > enough > > to keep everyone happy. > > > > Directions: > > We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the > Brothers > > launch > > site. At this web URL, there are two directions. > > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm > > > > We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not > create > > any > > more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. > > The > > firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll > have > > a fire > > Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk > and > > good > > times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some > > firewood. > > We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We > normally > > get to > > watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us > > have been > > out there till 3am and later. > > > > New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch > > site, and > > has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need > to > > be > > prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, > > sunburns can > > happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And > > sun-screen, > > sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta > potties > > available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site > > to learn > > more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we > > expect to > > have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to > > the site. > > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm > > > > We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and > running > > of the > > event. > > > > Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. > Prepare > > you and > > your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold > or > > hot, > > water is > > so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you > > bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group > > healthy. > > > > Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required > to > > have > > one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per > day > > and > > that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. > > > > Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at > > 9:30am > > Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th > > through 18th. > > > > Cheers, > > Robert > > > > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > > OREGONROCKETRY - > > ROCKETOBER > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 14:20:39 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:20:39 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D535@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D110@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> <8CC1976D243BD44-5298-A261@webmail-m090.sysops.aol.com> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D4F4@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D535@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: you know if I cluster 80 C6-7's I might clear the pad. That would bee a hoot... On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Krausert, Robert wrote: > That's why I exist. Not smart, but yes - a smart ass. ;-) > > Cheers, > Robert > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Christopher Guenther [mailto:guentherchristopher at gmail.com] > *Sent:* Monday, October 12, 2009 2:06 PM > *To:* Krausert, Robert > *Cc:* Gary Lech; NWRocketry List > > *Subject:* Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > LMAO! > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Krausert, Robert < > robert.krausert at intel.com> wrote: > >> Now Chris... >> >> You know we all mean the best. We try so hard not to critisize, and simply >> offer advise. You're ready for what appears a J570 L2 certification flight. >> But now you're also talking about C6 motors. You might want to rethink that, >> maybe a bit aggressive. Just make sure the airframe can handle the thrust >> curve of that C. >> >> LOL. >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >> On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther >> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 12:28 PM >> To: Gary Lech >> Cc: NWRocketry List >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >> >> I will bring a bunch of C6-7's I do not have a LPR to use them in so >> anyone >> is welcome to them. >> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Gary Lech wrote: >> >> > That'll make 2 of us then. Hopefully, the cloud ceiling will be above >> 5300 >> > ft AGL (9800 ft MSL at Brothers). My L1 cert rocket sims at 2800 ft. >> Perhaps >> > we'll get some openings in the clouds for our flights. I'm planning to >> bring >> > the low power fleet too so we can still have some flying fun no matter >> what. >> > Cheers from ~ >> > Gary >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > >> > From: Christopher Guenther >> > To: Gary Lech >> > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:53 AM >> > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >> > >> > >> > I would am going no matter what myself. I was given the L2 written >> > yesterday by Steve Tarr and passed with 37 out of 37. So I am ramped >> and >> > ready to launch my L2 cert. I do not see anything that would keep me >> from >> > going at this point. If I break down on the way I will call my dad in >> > eastern Washington and have him start relaying the message for help over >> the >> > Ham radio. Maybe someone from the launch will pass by or hear the call >> and >> > come to the rescue. If all goes well my L2 should apogee between 5000 >> and >> > 5300 feet depending on the wind. I am also bringing a couple of naked >> body >> > tubes and another 38mm rocket I just finished building as a back up >> > contingency. I am finding that I do not like the fragility of PML's >> > phenolic tubing. After Rocketober I will start glassing all PML tubing >> or >> > just using them for layup molds. I have a 5" piece of 3.9 pml that >> rolled >> > off the table and landed on it side. That side is now weak and has been >> > tossed in the trash. >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: >> > >> > >> > Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! >> > >> > >> > >> > I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is >> bad. >> > >> > >> > >> > Cheers, >> > >> > Gary >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Krausert, Robert >> > To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com < >> > rockets at rocketsnw.com> >> > Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am >> > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Sir, >> > We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. >> > >> > Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The >> weather >> > outlook >> > has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday >> > still has >> > 40% chance of precip. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Robert >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: >> > rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On >> > Behalf Of Gary Lech >> > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM >> > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >> > >> > Hi folks, >> > I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be >> > cancelled at the >> > last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling >> > required to >> > fly? >> > >> > Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd >> and >> > enjoy >> > the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to >> > getting rid >> > of me for a few days. >> > >> > Cheers from new guy ~ >> > Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( >> > >> http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 >> > ) >> > >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: Robert Krausert >> > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org >> > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM >> > Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket >> > LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 >> > >> > >> > We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. >> > >> > Weather forecast is: >> > Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers >> > Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers >> > Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds >> > Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. >> > >> > Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank >> > you sir. >> > >> > Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast >> out >> > there >> > for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive >> > changes in >> > rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Robert >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: Robert Krausert >> > To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM >> > Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc >> > ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th >> > 2009 >> > >> > >> > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - >> > OREGONROCKETRY - >> > ROCKETOBER - >> > >> > As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to >> > announce our >> > Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October >> 16th >> > through >> > 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will >> join >> > us for a >> > very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific >> > Northwest. You >> > are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. >> > >> > Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry >> > begins with >> > OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for >> > OregonRocketry. >> > We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are >> > one. This >> > launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining >> > flights. >> > >> > October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher >> are >> > welcome >> > to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance >> with >> > TRA >> > research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, >> are >> > allowed >> > to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under >> 18, >> > and >> > invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in >> the >> > prep >> > area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly >> rockets >> > on >> > Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA >> members. >> > >> > Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor >> > days. >> > Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You >> do >> > not need >> > to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and >> motors, >> > and spend >> > some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday >> > and 8:00am >> > to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need >> > something on >> > your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! >> > >> > Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in >> > the dark. >> > But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. >> Those >> > glow >> > sticks taped to rockets can work. The o >> > nsite FSO will need to make sure >> > everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before >> > committing. They may have ideas. >> > >> > This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I >> have >> > some >> > ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During >> > the day >> > and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or >> > treat you >> > to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep >> > them at >> > bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood >> to >> > contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes >> after a >> > long >> > day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the >> > center one, >> > located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to >> share. >> > Also, >> > consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee >> like >> > devices >> > at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at >> the >> > community >> > fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, >> that's >> > up to >> > them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. >> > >> > The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA >> safety >> > code. >> > As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please >> visit >> > the >> > OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR >> and >> > TRA >> > websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to >> > comprehend >> > and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will >> be >> > reviewed >> > by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. >> If >> > you are >> > bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about >> > stability, >> > center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage >> and >> > complex >> > rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. >> > >> > Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the >> > public. We >> > certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot >> of >> > fun. >> > >> > We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA >> > clearance to >> > 25,000 feet above sea level ( >> > or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have >> > a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA >> rules >> > are 75% >> > of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or >> > 15,375 feet >> > AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be >> high >> > enough >> > to keep everyone happy. >> > >> > Directions: >> > We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the >> Brothers >> > launch >> > site. At this web URL, there are two directions. >> > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm >> > >> > We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not >> create >> > any >> > more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new >> ones. >> > The >> > firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll >> have >> > a fire >> > Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk >> and >> > good >> > times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some >> > firewood. >> > We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We >> normally >> > get to >> > watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us >> > have been >> > out there till 3am and later. >> > >> > New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch >> > site, and >> > has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need >> to >> > be >> > prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, >> > sunburns can >> > happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And >> > sun-screen, >> > sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta >> potties >> > available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web >> site >> > to learn >> > more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we >> > expect to >> > have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact >> to >> > the site. >> > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm >> > >> > We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and >> running >> > of the >> > event. >> > >> > Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. >> Prepare >> > you and >> > your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold >> or >> > hot, >> > water is >> > so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you >> > bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group >> > healthy. >> > >> > Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required >> to >> > have >> > one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per >> day >> > and >> > that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. >> > >> > Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at >> > 9:30am >> > Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th >> > through 18th. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Robert >> > >> > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - >> > OREGONROCKETRY - >> > ROCKETOBER >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Rockets mailing list >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Rockets mailing list >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Rockets mailing list >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Rockets mailing list >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > From angelawr at wrightholdings.com Mon Oct 12 14:21:59 2009 From: angelawr at wrightholdings.com (Angela "Red" Wright) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:21:59 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust In-Reply-To: References: <1827260580.4399591255197446988.JavaMail.root@sz0028a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <8D6D2A99EE7C834089CC7FB702E34716037018@BL2PRD0102MB018.prod.exchangelabs.com> It's just supposed to be fun, it's a hobby! Take the good with the bad, the "bashing" with the encouragement and make friends, or don't. We love having new people and their ideas here. But as I always say "It's just a hobby" so if you can't let water roll off your back and take some things with a grain of salt than maybe you need to re-examine why you are in this hobby and why you post. Let's all just get along and hug this out!! Angela Dinese Wright -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 12:12 PM To: bwhitemarsh at comcast.net; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust Those of you out there that are attempting to Bash my idea are the reason so few people come to the hobby or even stay in for very long. You should be offering encouragement instead. Lucky for me the more I get told by people that are not a part of the conversation that I can't do it the more apt I am to do it! Most of this conversation was taken off list for that reason and to keep some thing secret from the rest(trade secrets, gotta keep em). So as for most of you who are also going to chip your 2 cents in as to why I or anyone else can't save it. You will just be fueling my ambitions and most likely dousing others. Maybe mix in some advice and encouragement with your criticism. * What does anyone gain in experience if they do not attempt to try?* On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:57 AM, wrote: > > > Christopher: > > I got my level 2 cert this year at FITS. I went to BALLS this year as an > observer to see how the "Big Boys" do it. I took away a couple of major > learning points: (1) There is a huge difference between a Level 2 rocket > and a Level 3 project. I observed at least 2 shredded Level 3 attempts at > BALLS. It is apparent to me that a level three project is something more > than just, "build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F's or Ray's motor." > (2) There is a lot to be learned by watching more advanced fliers, asking > questions, and observing their results. By my count, you are currently one > for two in Level 1 flights. I have read your posted questions and it is > apparent that you (like manyof us) still have a lot to learn about high > power rocketry before "cramming a motor" in an L3 project. And that doesn't > even take into account the massive increase in complexity of a ridiculous > thrust, minimum-diameter project that has even the "Big Boys" wondering if > it can be done. Ask Bob Yanacek about his last minimum-diameter project. > > Just my two cents, but I think there is a lot to be gained from stepping > back, talking less, getting some L1 and L2 flights under your belt, and > trying to glean as much as you can from those who have been there and done > that before insulting Mike F and others with thoughts of cramming their > motors in your L3 project. I know I'll be spending some serious time flying > Level 2 before even thinking about stepping up. No offense intended. > > > > Bryan Whitemarsh > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> > To: "W. Raymond Stoner " > Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > Sent: Friday, October 9, 2009 8:06:04 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > That is why I build it, cert with it, then cram in Mike F. 's or Ray's > motor. > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM, W. Raymond Stoner > wrote: > > > You can't cert on a research motor. > > Ray > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com [ mailto :rockets-bounces at rocketsnw .com] > > On Behalf Of Robert Krausert > > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:51 PM > > To: Christopher Guenther ; Dennis S Winningstad > > Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > > Chris, > > You want to get your L3 cert on a 54mm 72 inch motor that will exceed > 100+ > > g's and push mach 3 for several seconds? For me, I'd ask for a L3 sponsor > > so > > > > I could fly. But I'd never use that for my L3. This motor will out > perform > > most military spec missiles. I'd keep away from it except for fun. As a > > cert > > > > flight, scary. Save the L3 cert flight for something you have control > over. > > Mike's motor is more of a "just try to survive." > > > > Think of trying to build a uniform to survive an impact from a logging > > truck > > > > approaching for a direct hit at 120 mph. I know I'd become a red splatter > > on > > > > the road. Your rocket needs to go from zero to "oh my god!!" in about 0.3 > > seconds. > > > > You might want to reconsider. That is all up to you. > > > > Cheers, > > Robert > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Christopher Guenther " < guentherchristopher @ gmail .com> > > To: "Dennis S Winningstad " < winningstad @comcast.net> > > Cc: > > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 7:36 PM > > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > > > > > >I know I would have to be L3. I would use it to attempt a cert for L3. > > > Since I built everything but the motor it would qualify would it not? > I > > > plan to be L2 somewhere mid Rocketober . If not then deffinently > before > > > next > > > BALLS. That would be a great time to Cert L3. > > > > > > Chris Guenther > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Dennis S Winningstad < > > > winningstad @comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > >> Ray, are YOU Lvl 3? Then what's the problem????????????? > > >> > > >> Dennis S Winningstad > > >> 503-781-3529 > > >> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com > > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > > >> On Behalf Of W. Raymond Stoner > > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:42 PM > > >> To: 'Christopher Guenther' ; Mfreptiles @ aol .com > > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > >> > > >> You need to be L3 to fly this motor. > > >> > > >> Ray > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com > > >> [ mailto :rockets-bounces@ rocketsnw .com] > > >> On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > > >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:13 AM > > >> To: Mfreptiles @ aol .com > > >> Cc: Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > >> > > >> You have peaked my interest. I would love to build the vehicle. I > love > > >> building rockets. As a Stay at home Dad I find rocket building keeps > my > > >> hands busy and my mind active. (wife had better benefits then I did > > when > > >> the kids were born) > > >> > > >> Chris Guenther > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 8:40 AM, < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> wrote: > > >> > > >> > The preferred launch vehicle would be minimum diameter. The motor > is > > >> 72" > > >> > long. > > >> > > > >> > At minimum diameter, it would exceed the waiver at Brothers by a > good > > >> > margin. Unless you can get call ins up to 50K' out at Brothers, > this > > >> > is > > >> a > > >> > BALLS flight. > > >> > > > >> > Mike F. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > In a message dated 10/8/2009 10:58:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > >> > lawndart . robert @ gmail .com writes: > > >> > > > >> > Mike, > > >> > It would be a pleasure to build a rocket and a pleasure to fly your > > >> > 54mm > > >> > motor in it. If no one else has signed up, I'd be happy to use it > > >> > during > > >> > an > > >> > EX day next year. > > >> > > > >> > Just send me the known length and weight. Plus the impulse > parameters > > >> > if > > >> > you > > >> > have them. I'll be happy to bring a rocket to fly it. > > >> > > > >> > Am I saying an auto-shred? No way. I'll try to make it work. > > >> > > > >> > Cheers, > > >> > Robert > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > > >> > From: < Mfreptiles @ aol .com> > > >> > To: < sutchek @ sbcglobal .net>; ; > > >> > > > >> > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:22 PM > > >> > Subject: Re: [ RocketsNW ] Shreds/rocket tube loading / thrust > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Your use of caps indicates yelling/confrontation. Maybe not your > > >> > intent, > > >> > > but that's the way it reads. > > >> > > > > >> > > Hopefully you'll take me up on my motor offer. I want it to fly > > >> > > but > > >> am > > >> > > burned out on building airframes. If you are serious, let me > know > > >> > before > > >> > > someone else speaks for it. > > >> > > > > >> > > Mike F. > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > In a message dated 10/8/2009 8:10:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > >> > > sutchek @ sbcglobal .net writes: > > >> > > > > >> > > I DID NOT MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE > > >> > > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > Rockets mailing list > > >> > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > >> > Rockets mailing list > > >> > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > > >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Rockets mailing list > > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Rockets mailing list > > >> Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > >> http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Rockets mailing list > > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets@ rocketsnw .com > http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From angelawr at wrightholdings.com Mon Oct 12 14:26:12 2009 From: angelawr at wrightholdings.com (Angela "Red" Wright) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:26:12 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Favorite rocket songs... In-Reply-To: References: <000f01ca2a96$d2bd1af0$783750d0$@net> Message-ID: <8D6D2A99EE7C834089CC7FB702E34716037055@BL2PRD0102MB018.prod.exchangelabs.com> And the song "Rocket" by Def Leppard. :) Angela Dinese Wright -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of C Bennight Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 5:23 PM To: sealtee at cableone.net; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Favorite rocket songs... Cameron, I think there was another "Rocketman" by Sir Elton John. The lyrics went something like this: "And I think it's gonna be a long, long time till touchdown brings us round again to find, I'm not the man they think I am at home Oh no no no, I'm a Rocketman." Mike > From: sealtee at cableone.net > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 16:57:39 -0700 > Subject: [RocketsNW] Favorite rocket songs... > > We were discussing this one in our home and could not come up with but one, > so I put this one out to all of you. > > What is your favorite rocket or space song and who was it by? All that we > could really remember was the David Bowie song "Rocketman" from the 70's. I > know that there are others I just can't seem to recall them, can you? > > > > Cameron Tinder > > Still NAR & TRA L1 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _________________________________________________________________ Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you. http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MSHYCB_BackToSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1 _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From angelawr at wrightholdings.com Mon Oct 12 14:30:07 2009 From: angelawr at wrightholdings.com (Angela "Red" Wright) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:30:07 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Introduction In-Reply-To: <3AD26F66BFC5474886A4F4CBDB756D7D@MEDIONDeskTop> References: <4ab12319.28015a0a.0b1b.ffffb63c@mx.google.com> <3AD26F66BFC5474886A4F4CBDB756D7D@MEDIONDeskTop> Message-ID: <8D6D2A99EE7C834089CC7FB702E34716037064@BL2PRD0102MB018.prod.exchangelabs.com> Welcome! I like PML's kits, have had good success with them. Also Tim Leer at Wildman has some great stuff which I prefer. Sometimes it's just trial and error of what you like and what you build. I like the ones with lots of fins, but the guys will all tell you Im nuts!! :) Of course my Level II bird was destroyed on its second mission while we were in Nevada so now I get to build two more new birds, very exciting for me. Good luck! Angela Dinese Wright -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bryon Schopp Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 12:20 PM To: Aaron Evans; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Introduction Welcome back to rocketry. I to am a B.A.R. and when I attended my first WAC launch I drove them nuts with questions. But if you don't ask, you won't learn. Like Mark said, come to the launch this weekend and feel free to ask all the questions you want. I think everyone would agree that rail buttons are the way to go. Make sure not to use the metal ones as I believe that WAC has a rule against using them on club rails. As for your first HP rocket, you will get a lot of different ideas. You may want to consider one that could be used for both level 1 & level 2. You may not be thinking about level 2 now but once you are fully addicted to AP you will get there :) Bryon Schopp ----- Original Message ----- From: "Aaron Evans" To: Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 10:39 AM Subject: [RocketsNW] Introduction >I had to opportunity to meet some of you at last Saturday's club meeting >for > Washington Aerospace. > > I wanted to comment on how impressed I was with everybody and how welcomed > I > was to the meeting. > > And I wanted to Introduce myself to the rest of the RocketsNW community. > > > > As I understand it, I'm a B.A.R. returning to the hobby after 25 years. > But > a lot has changed and there is a lot I need to learn. > > I'll apologize in advance, because undoubtedly I'll be asking some pretty > basic questions. > > And also because I'm new on the mailing list and perhaps these questions > have already come up many times before. > > But I appreciate any feedback or advice anyone is willing to offer. > > > > With that in mind, here is my first request to the group. > > > > I'm in the process of selecting a kit for my 1st High Power Rocket that I > can use for a level 1 certification. > > At this point, I want to follow the K.I.S.S. principle, but I'm not just > looking for an easy to slap together kit. > > I've picked up that, it seems, few people would actually build a kit > as-is. > > So I'm looking for advice on what to look for, what to avoid, and what > needs > to be modified. > > > > I've picked up a few suggestions already about tossing the launch lugs in > favor of using rail guides, and using U bolts instead of eye bolts. > > I've been looking at some kits from Public Missiles Ltd. They seem to > really > like their Piston Deployment System. But I've heard mixed reviews about > it. > > > > I realize I'm casting a pretty wide net in terms of subject matter. I'm > hoping to use this to learn more about the subjects and uncover the > questions I currently don't know to ask. > > As well as a jumping off point for the other questions I have. > > > > Thanks for your patience as I get up to speed, and I hope to get a chance > to > meet more of you soon. > > > > - Aaron > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 14:41:31 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:41:31 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43AA9E28@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D4F4@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D535@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43AA9E28@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: It is tempting to get some and paint a rocket with it though isn't it? I know I am tempted. Do they have a minimum distance provision for a mildly radio active rocket? Check this site out http://www.glowinc.com/ On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Krausert, Robert wrote: > Sweet. Nothing like spraying a little Uranium 235 onto rockets for some > glow factor. ;-) > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Christopher Guenther [mailto:guentherchristopher at gmail.com] > *Sent:* Monday, October 12, 2009 2:23 PM > *To:* Krausert, Robert > *Subject:* Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > Check this out no more batteries or electronics for night flights. > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Christopher Guenther < > guentherchristopher at gmail.com> wrote: > >> you know if I cluster 80 C6-7's I might clear the pad. That would bee a >> hoot... >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Krausert, Robert < >> robert.krausert at intel.com> wrote: >> >>> That's why I exist. Not smart, but yes - a smart ass. ;-) >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Robert >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* Christopher Guenther [mailto:guentherchristopher at gmail.com] >>> *Sent:* Monday, October 12, 2009 2:06 PM >>> *To:* Krausert, Robert >>> *Cc:* Gary Lech; NWRocketry List >>> >>> *Subject:* Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >>> >>> LMAO! >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Krausert, Robert < >>> robert.krausert at intel.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Now Chris... >>>> >>>> You know we all mean the best. We try so hard not to critisize, and >>>> simply offer advise. You're ready for what appears a J570 L2 certification >>>> flight. But now you're also talking about C6 motors. You might want to >>>> rethink that, maybe a bit aggressive. Just make sure the airframe can handle >>>> the thrust curve of that C. >>>> >>>> LOL. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Robert >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: >>>> rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther >>>> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 12:28 PM >>>> To: Gary Lech >>>> Cc: NWRocketry List >>>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >>>> >>>> I will bring a bunch of C6-7's I do not have a LPR to use them in so >>>> anyone >>>> is welcome to them. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Gary Lech wrote: >>>> >>>> > That'll make 2 of us then. Hopefully, the cloud ceiling will be above >>>> 5300 >>>> > ft AGL (9800 ft MSL at Brothers). My L1 cert rocket sims at 2800 ft. >>>> Perhaps >>>> > we'll get some openings in the clouds for our flights. I'm planning to >>>> bring >>>> > the low power fleet too so we can still have some flying fun no matter >>>> what. >>>> > Cheers from ~ >>>> > Gary >>>> > ----- Original Message ----- >>>> > >>>> > From: Christopher Guenther >>>> > To: Gary Lech >>>> > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:53 AM >>>> > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > I would am going no matter what myself. I was given the L2 written >>>> > yesterday by Steve Tarr and passed with 37 out of 37. So I am ramped >>>> and >>>> > ready to launch my L2 cert. I do not see anything that would keep me >>>> from >>>> > going at this point. If I break down on the way I will call my dad in >>>> > eastern Washington and have him start relaying the message for help >>>> over the >>>> > Ham radio. Maybe someone from the launch will pass by or hear the >>>> call and >>>> > come to the rescue. If all goes well my L2 should apogee between 5000 >>>> and >>>> > 5300 feet depending on the wind. I am also bringing a couple of naked >>>> body >>>> > tubes and another 38mm rocket I just finished building as a back up >>>> > contingency. I am finding that I do not like the fragility of PML's >>>> > phenolic tubing. After Rocketober I will start glassing all PML >>>> tubing or >>>> > just using them for layup molds. I have a 5" piece of 3.9 pml that >>>> rolled >>>> > off the table and landed on it side. That side is now weak and has >>>> been >>>> > tossed in the trash. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is >>>> bad. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Cheers, >>>> > >>>> > Gary >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > -----Original Message----- >>>> > From: Krausert, Robert >>>> > To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com < >>>> > rockets at rocketsnw.com> >>>> > Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am >>>> > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Sir, >>>> > We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. >>>> > >>>> > Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The >>>> weather >>>> > outlook >>>> > has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday >>>> > still has >>>> > 40% chance of precip. >>>> > >>>> > Cheers, >>>> > Robert >>>> > >>>> > -----Original Message----- >>>> > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: >>>> > rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On >>>> > Behalf Of Gary Lech >>>> > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM >>>> > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >>>> > >>>> > Hi folks, >>>> > I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be >>>> > cancelled at the >>>> > last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling >>>> > required to >>>> > fly? >>>> > >>>> > Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the >>>> crowd and >>>> > enjoy >>>> > the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to >>>> > getting rid >>>> > of me for a few days. >>>> > >>>> > Cheers from new guy ~ >>>> > Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( >>>> > >>>> http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 >>>> > ) >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > ----- Original Message ----- >>>> > From: Robert Krausert >>>> > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org >>>> > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM >>>> > Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober >>>> Rocket >>>> > LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. >>>> > >>>> > Weather forecast is: >>>> > Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers >>>> > Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers >>>> > Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds >>>> > Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. >>>> > >>>> > Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. >>>> Thank >>>> > you sir. >>>> > >>>> > Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make >>>> toast out >>>> > there >>>> > for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive >>>> > changes in >>>> > rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. >>>> > >>>> > Cheers, >>>> > Robert >>>> > >>>> > ----- Original Message ----- >>>> > From: Robert Krausert >>>> > To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> > Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM >>>> > Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc >>>> > ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th >>>> > 2009 >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - >>>> > OREGONROCKETRY - >>>> > ROCKETOBER - >>>> > >>>> > As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to >>>> > announce our >>>> > Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October >>>> 16th >>>> > through >>>> > 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will >>>> join >>>> > us for a >>>> > very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific >>>> > Northwest. You >>>> > are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. >>>> > >>>> > Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry >>>> > begins with >>>> > OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for >>>> > OregonRocketry. >>>> > We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you >>>> are >>>> > one. This >>>> > launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of >>>> entertaining >>>> > flights. >>>> > >>>> > October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher >>>> are >>>> > welcome >>>> > to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance >>>> with >>>> > TRA >>>> > research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any >>>> level, are >>>> > allowed >>>> > to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those >>>> under 18, >>>> > and >>>> > invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in >>>> the >>>> > prep >>>> > area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly >>>> rockets >>>> > on >>>> > Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA >>>> members. >>>> > >>>> > Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor >>>> > days. >>>> > Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You >>>> do >>>> > not need >>>> > to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and >>>> motors, >>>> > and spend >>>> > some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm >>>> Saturday >>>> > and 8:00am >>>> > to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need >>>> > something on >>>> > your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! >>>> > >>>> > Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying >>>> in >>>> > the dark. >>>> > But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. >>>> Those >>>> > glow >>>> > sticks taped to rockets can work. The o >>>> > nsite FSO will need to make sure >>>> > everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea >>>> before >>>> > committing. They may have ideas. >>>> > >>>> > This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I >>>> have >>>> > some >>>> > ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. >>>> During >>>> > the day >>>> > and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick >>>> or >>>> > treat you >>>> > to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to >>>> keep >>>> > them at >>>> > bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring >>>> firewood to >>>> > contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes >>>> after a >>>> > long >>>> > day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the >>>> > center one, >>>> > located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to >>>> share. >>>> > Also, >>>> > consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee >>>> like >>>> > devices >>>> > at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at >>>> the >>>> > community >>>> > fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, >>>> that's >>>> > up to >>>> > them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. >>>> > >>>> > The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA >>>> safety >>>> > code. >>>> > As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please >>>> visit >>>> > the >>>> > OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit >>>> NAR and >>>> > TRA >>>> > websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to >>>> > comprehend >>>> > and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will >>>> be >>>> > reviewed >>>> > by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your >>>> flight. If >>>> > you are >>>> > bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions >>>> about >>>> > stability, >>>> > center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage >>>> and >>>> > complex >>>> > rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. >>>> > >>>> > Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the >>>> > public. We >>>> > certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a >>>> lot of >>>> > fun. >>>> > >>>> > We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA >>>> > clearance to >>>> > 25,000 feet above sea level ( >>>> > or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have >>>> > a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA >>>> rules >>>> > are 75% >>>> > of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level >>>> (or >>>> > 15,375 feet >>>> > AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be >>>> high >>>> > enough >>>> > to keep everyone happy. >>>> > >>>> > Directions: >>>> > We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the >>>> Brothers >>>> > launch >>>> > site. At this web URL, there are two directions. >>>> > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm >>>> > >>>> > We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not >>>> create >>>> > any >>>> > more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new >>>> ones. >>>> > The >>>> > firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll >>>> have >>>> > a fire >>>> > Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket >>>> talk and >>>> > good >>>> > times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring >>>> some >>>> > firewood. >>>> > We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We >>>> normally >>>> > get to >>>> > watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of >>>> us >>>> > have been >>>> > out there till 3am and later. >>>> > >>>> > New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great >>>> launch >>>> > site, and >>>> > has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You >>>> need to >>>> > be >>>> > prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, >>>> > sunburns can >>>> > happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. >>>> And >>>> > sun-screen, >>>> > sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta >>>> potties >>>> > available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web >>>> site >>>> > to learn >>>> > more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we >>>> > expect to >>>> > have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact >>>> to >>>> > the site. >>>> > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm >>>> > >>>> > We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and >>>> running >>>> > of the >>>> > event. >>>> > >>>> > Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. >>>> Prepare >>>> > you and >>>> > your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. >>>> Cold or >>>> > hot, >>>> > water is >>>> > so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are >>>> you >>>> > bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your >>>> group >>>> > healthy. >>>> > >>>> > Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is >>>> required to >>>> > have >>>> > one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 >>>> per day >>>> > and >>>> > that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. >>>> > >>>> > Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting >>>> at >>>> > 9:30am >>>> > Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th >>>> > through 18th. >>>> > >>>> > Cheers, >>>> > Robert >>>> > >>>> > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - >>>> > OREGONROCKETRY - >>>> > ROCKETOBER >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > Rockets mailing list >>>> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> > >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > Rockets mailing list >>>> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > Rockets mailing list >>>> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > Rockets mailing list >>>> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>> >> > From bphlat234 at comcast.net Mon Oct 12 14:42:12 2009 From: bphlat234 at comcast.net (Gary Harris) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:42:12 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: References: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert><0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D110@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com><8CC1976D243BD44-5298-A261@webmail-m090.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <27C5C8EAC25E440B9BD6066E4F3A76A3@Garylaptop> and the prediction of when we will see partly sunny days and showery days changes every day, twice sofar since Robert's original post. I'll be hanging out Sat/Sun waiting for a window. most likely there will be some showers and also some clearings to fly in, but it's hard to tell when. Once at Rocketober I flew a rocket in the late afternoon, it was fairly clear and not cold, by the time I recovered it it was about 35F and blowing snow sideways. Gary Harris ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Clark" To: "Gary Lech" Cc: Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:25 AM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather We won't cancel the launch, but if the weather's bad, there might not be too much going UP! On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: > > Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! > > > > I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is bad. > > > > Cheers, > > Gary > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Krausert, Robert > To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > > Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > > > Sir, > We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. > > Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The weather > outlook > has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday still > has > 40% chance of precip. > > Cheers, > Robert > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On > Behalf Of Gary Lech > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > Hi folks, > I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be cancelled > at the > last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling required > to > fly? > > Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd and > enjoy > the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to getting > rid > of me for a few days. > > Cheers from new guy ~ > Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( > http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 > ) > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Robert Krausert > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM > Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket > LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 > > > We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. > > Weather forecast is: > Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers > Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers > Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds > Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. > > Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank you > sir. > > Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast out > there > for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive changes > in > rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. > > Cheers, > Robert > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Robert Krausert > To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM > Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc > ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th > 2009 > > > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > OREGONROCKETRY - > ROCKETOBER - > > As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to announce > our > Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th > through > 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join us > for a > very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific Northwest. > You > are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. > > Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry begins > with > OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for > OregonRocketry. > We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are one. > This > launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining > flights. > > October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are > welcome > to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with > TRA > research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are > allowed > to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, > and > invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the > prep > area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets on > Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. > > Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor days. > Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do not > need > to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, and > spend > some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday and > 8:00am > to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need something > on > your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! > > Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in the > dark. > But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those > glow > sticks taped to rockets can work. The o > nsite FSO will need to make sure > everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before > committing. They may have ideas. > > This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have some > ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During the > day > and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or > treat you > to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep them > at > bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to > contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a > long > day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the center > one, > located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. > Also, > consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like > devices > at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the > community > fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's > up to > them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. > > The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety > code. > As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit > the > OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and > TRA > websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to > comprehend > and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be > reviewed > by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If > you are > bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about > stability, > center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and > complex > rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. > > Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the public. > We > certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of > fun. > > We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA clearance > to > 25,000 feet above sea level ( > or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have > a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules > are 75% > of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or > 15,375 feet > AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high > enough > to keep everyone happy. > > Directions: > We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers > launch > site. At this web URL, there are two directions. > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm > > We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create any > more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. The > firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have a > fire > Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk and > good > times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some > firewood. > We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally > get to > watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us have > been > out there till 3am and later. > > New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch site, > and > has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to be > prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, sunburns > can > happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And > sun-screen, > sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties > available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site to > learn > more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we expect > to > have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to the > site. > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm > > We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running of > the > event. > > Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare you > and > your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or > hot, > water is > so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you > bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group > healthy. > > Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to > have > one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day > and > that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. > > Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at 9:30am > Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th through > 18th. > > Cheers, > Robert > > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > OREGONROCKETRY - > ROCKETOBER > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 14:48:46 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:48:46 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: References: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D110@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> <8CC1976D243BD44-5298-A261@webmail-m090.sysops.aol.com> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D4F4@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D535@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: Hey My freind is almost done building his 11x E cluster rocket. That is going to be a fun flight to see at one of the spring brothers launches. On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Christopher Guenther < guentherchristopher at gmail.com> wrote: > you know if I cluster 80 C6-7's I might clear the pad. That would bee a > hoot... > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Krausert, Robert < > robert.krausert at intel.com> wrote: > >> That's why I exist. Not smart, but yes - a smart ass. ;-) >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* Christopher Guenther [mailto:guentherchristopher at gmail.com] >> *Sent:* Monday, October 12, 2009 2:06 PM >> *To:* Krausert, Robert >> *Cc:* Gary Lech; NWRocketry List >> >> *Subject:* Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >> >> LMAO! >> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Krausert, Robert < >> robert.krausert at intel.com> wrote: >> >>> Now Chris... >>> >>> You know we all mean the best. We try so hard not to critisize, and >>> simply offer advise. You're ready for what appears a J570 L2 certification >>> flight. But now you're also talking about C6 motors. You might want to >>> rethink that, maybe a bit aggressive. Just make sure the airframe can handle >>> the thrust curve of that C. >>> >>> LOL. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Robert >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: >>> rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther >>> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 12:28 PM >>> To: Gary Lech >>> Cc: NWRocketry List >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >>> >>> I will bring a bunch of C6-7's I do not have a LPR to use them in so >>> anyone >>> is welcome to them. >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Gary Lech wrote: >>> >>> > That'll make 2 of us then. Hopefully, the cloud ceiling will be above >>> 5300 >>> > ft AGL (9800 ft MSL at Brothers). My L1 cert rocket sims at 2800 ft. >>> Perhaps >>> > we'll get some openings in the clouds for our flights. I'm planning to >>> bring >>> > the low power fleet too so we can still have some flying fun no matter >>> what. >>> > Cheers from ~ >>> > Gary >>> > ----- Original Message ----- >>> > >>> > From: Christopher Guenther >>> > To: Gary Lech >>> > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:53 AM >>> > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >>> > >>> > >>> > I would am going no matter what myself. I was given the L2 written >>> > yesterday by Steve Tarr and passed with 37 out of 37. So I am ramped >>> and >>> > ready to launch my L2 cert. I do not see anything that would keep me >>> from >>> > going at this point. If I break down on the way I will call my dad in >>> > eastern Washington and have him start relaying the message for help >>> over the >>> > Ham radio. Maybe someone from the launch will pass by or hear the call >>> and >>> > come to the rescue. If all goes well my L2 should apogee between 5000 >>> and >>> > 5300 feet depending on the wind. I am also bringing a couple of naked >>> body >>> > tubes and another 38mm rocket I just finished building as a back up >>> > contingency. I am finding that I do not like the fragility of PML's >>> > phenolic tubing. After Rocketober I will start glassing all PML tubing >>> or >>> > just using them for layup molds. I have a 5" piece of 3.9 pml that >>> rolled >>> > off the table and landed on it side. That side is now weak and has >>> been >>> > tossed in the trash. >>> > >>> > >>> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is >>> bad. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > Cheers, >>> > >>> > Gary >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -----Original Message----- >>> > From: Krausert, Robert >>> > To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com < >>> > rockets at rocketsnw.com> >>> > Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am >>> > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > Sir, >>> > We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. >>> > >>> > Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The >>> weather >>> > outlook >>> > has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday >>> > still has >>> > 40% chance of precip. >>> > >>> > Cheers, >>> > Robert >>> > >>> > -----Original Message----- >>> > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: >>> > rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On >>> > Behalf Of Gary Lech >>> > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM >>> > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >>> > >>> > Hi folks, >>> > I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be >>> > cancelled at the >>> > last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling >>> > required to >>> > fly? >>> > >>> > Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd >>> and >>> > enjoy >>> > the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to >>> > getting rid >>> > of me for a few days. >>> > >>> > Cheers from new guy ~ >>> > Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( >>> > >>> http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 >>> > ) >>> > >>> > >>> > ----- Original Message ----- >>> > From: Robert Krausert >>> > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org >>> > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM >>> > Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket >>> > LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 >>> > >>> > >>> > We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. >>> > >>> > Weather forecast is: >>> > Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers >>> > Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers >>> > Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds >>> > Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. >>> > >>> > Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. >>> Thank >>> > you sir. >>> > >>> > Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast >>> out >>> > there >>> > for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive >>> > changes in >>> > rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. >>> > >>> > Cheers, >>> > Robert >>> > >>> > ----- Original Message ----- >>> > From: Robert Krausert >>> > To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> > Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM >>> > Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc >>> > ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th >>> > 2009 >>> > >>> > >>> > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - >>> > OREGONROCKETRY - >>> > ROCKETOBER - >>> > >>> > As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to >>> > announce our >>> > Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October >>> 16th >>> > through >>> > 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will >>> join >>> > us for a >>> > very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific >>> > Northwest. You >>> > are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. >>> > >>> > Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry >>> > begins with >>> > OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for >>> > OregonRocketry. >>> > We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are >>> > one. This >>> > launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of >>> entertaining >>> > flights. >>> > >>> > October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher >>> are >>> > welcome >>> > to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance >>> with >>> > TRA >>> > research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, >>> are >>> > allowed >>> > to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under >>> 18, >>> > and >>> > invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in >>> the >>> > prep >>> > area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly >>> rockets >>> > on >>> > Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA >>> members. >>> > >>> > Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor >>> > days. >>> > Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You >>> do >>> > not need >>> > to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and >>> motors, >>> > and spend >>> > some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm >>> Saturday >>> > and 8:00am >>> > to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need >>> > something on >>> > your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! >>> > >>> > Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying >>> in >>> > the dark. >>> > But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. >>> Those >>> > glow >>> > sticks taped to rockets can work. The o >>> > nsite FSO will need to make sure >>> > everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea >>> before >>> > committing. They may have ideas. >>> > >>> > This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I >>> have >>> > some >>> > ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. >>> During >>> > the day >>> > and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick >>> or >>> > treat you >>> > to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep >>> > them at >>> > bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood >>> to >>> > contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes >>> after a >>> > long >>> > day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the >>> > center one, >>> > located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to >>> share. >>> > Also, >>> > consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee >>> like >>> > devices >>> > at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at >>> the >>> > community >>> > fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, >>> that's >>> > up to >>> > them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. >>> > >>> > The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA >>> safety >>> > code. >>> > As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please >>> visit >>> > the >>> > OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR >>> and >>> > TRA >>> > websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to >>> > comprehend >>> > and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will >>> be >>> > reviewed >>> > by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your >>> flight. If >>> > you are >>> > bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about >>> > stability, >>> > center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage >>> and >>> > complex >>> > rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. >>> > >>> > Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the >>> > public. We >>> > certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot >>> of >>> > fun. >>> > >>> > We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA >>> > clearance to >>> > 25,000 feet above sea level ( >>> > or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have >>> > a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA >>> rules >>> > are 75% >>> > of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or >>> > 15,375 feet >>> > AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be >>> high >>> > enough >>> > to keep everyone happy. >>> > >>> > Directions: >>> > We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the >>> Brothers >>> > launch >>> > site. At this web URL, there are two directions. >>> > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm >>> > >>> > We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not >>> create >>> > any >>> > more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new >>> ones. >>> > The >>> > firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll >>> have >>> > a fire >>> > Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk >>> and >>> > good >>> > times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring >>> some >>> > firewood. >>> > We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We >>> normally >>> > get to >>> > watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of >>> us >>> > have been >>> > out there till 3am and later. >>> > >>> > New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch >>> > site, and >>> > has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need >>> to >>> > be >>> > prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, >>> > sunburns can >>> > happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And >>> > sun-screen, >>> > sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta >>> potties >>> > available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web >>> site >>> > to learn >>> > more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we >>> > expect to >>> > have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact >>> to >>> > the site. >>> > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm >>> > >>> > We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and >>> running >>> > of the >>> > event. >>> > >>> > Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. >>> Prepare >>> > you and >>> > your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. >>> Cold or >>> > hot, >>> > water is >>> > so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you >>> > bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group >>> > healthy. >>> > >>> > Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is >>> required to >>> > have >>> > one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per >>> day >>> > and >>> > that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. >>> > >>> > Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at >>> > 9:30am >>> > Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th >>> > through 18th. >>> > >>> > Cheers, >>> > Robert >>> > >>> > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - >>> > OREGONROCKETRY - >>> > ROCKETOBER >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Rockets mailing list >>> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Rockets mailing list >>> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Rockets mailing list >>> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Rockets mailing list >>> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >> > From glech at aol.com Mon Oct 12 16:20:47 2009 From: glech at aol.com (Gary Lech) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:20:47 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather References: <583CD2961A704EEE9F6EA49AB21412F7@LaptopKrausert><0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43A1D110@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com><8CC1976D243BD44-5298-A261@webmail-m090.sysops.aol.com> <27C5C8EAC25E440B9BD6066E4F3A76A3@Garylaptop> Message-ID: Oh boy, it'll be an adventure! To be honest my only worry is getting over the Santiam Pass. Fortunately, I don't think this is gonna be a cold weather event. Driving my camper in the snow and ice is not fun. It looks like the daytime temps are gonna stay well above freezing. Cheers from ~ Gary Lech ----- Original Message ----- From: Gary Harris To: Greg Clark Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 2:42 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather and the prediction of when we will see partly sunny days and showery days changes every day, twice sofar since Robert's original post. I'll be hanging out Sat/Sun waiting for a window. most likely there will be some showers and also some clearings to fly in, but it's hard to tell when. Once at Rocketober I flew a rocket in the late afternoon, it was fairly clear and not cold, by the time I recovered it it was about 35F and blowing snow sideways. Gary Harris ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Clark" To: "Gary Lech" Cc: Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:25 AM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather We won't cancel the launch, but if the weather's bad, there might not be too much going UP! On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: > > Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! > > > > I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is bad. > > > > Cheers, > > Gary > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Krausert, Robert > To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > > Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am > Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > > > Sir, > We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. > > Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The weather > outlook > has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday still > has > 40% chance of precip. > > Cheers, > Robert > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On > Behalf Of Gary Lech > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > Hi folks, > I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be cancelled > at the > last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling required > to > fly? > > Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd and > enjoy > the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to getting > rid > of me for a few days. > > Cheers from new guy ~ > Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( > http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 > ) > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Robert Krausert > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM > Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket > LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 > > > We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. > > Weather forecast is: > Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers > Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers > Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds > Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. > > Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank you > sir. > > Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast out > there > for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive changes > in > rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. > > Cheers, > Robert > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Robert Krausert > To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM > Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc > ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th > 2009 > > > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > OREGONROCKETRY - > ROCKETOBER - > > As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to announce > our > Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th > through > 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join us > for a > very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific Northwest. > You > are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. > > Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry begins > with > OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for > OregonRocketry. > We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are one. > This > launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining > flights. > > October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are > welcome > to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with > TRA > research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are > allowed > to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, > and > invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the > prep > area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets on > Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. > > Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor days. > Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do not > need > to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, and > spend > some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday and > 8:00am > to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need something > on > your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! > > Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in the > dark. > But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those > glow > sticks taped to rockets can work. The o > nsite FSO will need to make sure > everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before > committing. They may have ideas. > > This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have some > ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During the > day > and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or > treat you > to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep them > at > bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to > contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a > long > day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the center > one, > located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. > Also, > consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like > devices > at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the > community > fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's > up to > them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. > > The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety > code. > As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit > the > OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and > TRA > websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to > comprehend > and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be > reviewed > by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If > you are > bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about > stability, > center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and > complex > rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. > > Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the public. > We > certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of > fun. > > We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA clearance > to > 25,000 feet above sea level ( > or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have > a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules > are 75% > of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or > 15,375 feet > AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high > enough > to keep everyone happy. > > Directions: > We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers > launch > site. At this web URL, there are two directions. > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm > > We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create any > more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. The > firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have a > fire > Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk and > good > times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some > firewood. > We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally > get to > watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us have > been > out there till 3am and later. > > New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch site, > and > has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to be > prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, sunburns > can > happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And > sun-screen, > sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties > available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site to > learn > more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we expect > to > have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to the > site. > http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm > > We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running of > the > event. > > Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare you > and > your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or > hot, > water is > so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you > bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group > healthy. > > Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to > have > one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day > and > that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. > > Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at 9:30am > Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th through > 18th. > > Cheers, > Robert > > OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > OREGONROCKETRY - > ROCKETOBER > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From andrew at psas.pdx.edu Mon Oct 12 16:38:43 2009 From: andrew at psas.pdx.edu (Andrew Greenberg) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:38:43 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4AD3BE03.3050603@psas.pdx.edu> Hi everyone, We're still looking for an L3 person to help us launch this Sunday at Rocketober. We have a CTI N2500 reload that's got our name on it at Giant Leap, and a Aerotech 98 mm case, and a rocket all ready to go, but we don't have a L3 person to help us launch it this weekend. We hope to get some of our members L3 certified this spring/summer, but for now, we're really hoping someone will be able to help us out. If you have a L3, and will be at Rocketober this Sunday, could you drop me a line as soon as you can? Thanks! Andrew -- ------------------------------------------------------- Andrew Greenberg Portland State Aerospace Society (http://psas.pdx.edu/) andrew at psas.pdx.edu P: 503.788.1343 C: 503.708.7711 ------------------------------------------------------- From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Mon Oct 12 16:41:16 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (steve-c at ix.netcom.com) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:41:16 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather Message-ID: <10661302.1255390876468.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> It won't rain on Saturday! How do I know? Because I just bought a commercial motor and I haven't done such in over (2) years - see y'all on the sage. Anyone staying home because of the weather is a weeny. /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Gary Harris >Sent: Oct 12, 2009 2:42 PM >To: Greg Clark >Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > >and the prediction of when we will see partly sunny days and showery days >changes every day, twice sofar since Robert's original post. I'll be >hanging out Sat/Sun waiting for a window. > >most likely there will be some showers and also some clearings to fly in, >but it's hard to tell when. Once at Rocketober I flew a rocket in the late >afternoon, it was fairly clear and not cold, by the time I recovered it it >was about 35F and blowing snow sideways. > >Gary Harris > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Greg Clark" >To: "Gary Lech" >Cc: >Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:25 AM >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > >We won't cancel the launch, but if the weather's bad, there might not >be too much going UP! > >On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: >> >> Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! >> >> >> >> I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is bad. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Gary >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Krausert, Robert >> To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >> Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am >> Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >> >> >> >> >> Sir, >> We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. >> >> Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The weather >> outlook >> has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday still >> has >> 40% chance of precip. >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >> On >> Behalf Of Gary Lech >> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >> >> Hi folks, >> I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be cancelled >> at the >> last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling required >> to >> fly? >> >> Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd and >> enjoy >> the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to getting >> rid >> of me for a few days. >> >> Cheers from new guy ~ >> Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( >> http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 >> ) >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Robert Krausert >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org >> Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM >> Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket >> LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 >> >> >> We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. >> >> Weather forecast is: >> Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers >> Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers >> Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds >> Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. >> >> Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank you >> sir. >> >> Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast out >> there >> for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive changes >> in >> rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Robert Krausert >> To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM >> Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc >> ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th >> 2009 >> >> >> OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - >> OREGONROCKETRY - >> ROCKETOBER - >> >> As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to announce >> our >> Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th >> through >> 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join us >> for a >> very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific Northwest. >> You >> are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. >> >> Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry begins >> with >> OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for >> OregonRocketry. >> We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are one. >> This >> launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining >> flights. >> >> October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are >> welcome >> to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with >> TRA >> research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are >> allowed >> to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, >> and >> invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the >> prep >> area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets on >> Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. >> >> Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor days. >> Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do not >> need >> to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, and >> spend >> some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday and >> 8:00am >> to 2:00pm Sunday. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need something >> on >> your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! >> >> Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in the >> dark. >> But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those >> glow >> sticks taped to rockets can work. The o >> nsite FSO will need to make sure >> everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before >> committing. They may have ideas. >> >> This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have some >> ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During the >> day >> and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or >> treat you >> to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep them >> at >> bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to >> contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a >> long >> day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the center >> one, >> located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. >> Also, >> consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like >> devices >> at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the >> community >> fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's >> up to >> them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. >> >> The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety >> code. >> As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit >> the >> OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and >> TRA >> websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to >> comprehend >> and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be >> reviewed >> by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If >> you are >> bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about >> stability, >> center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and >> complex >> rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. >> >> Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the public. >> We >> certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of >> fun. >> >> We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA clearance >> to >> 25,000 feet above sea level ( >> or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have >> a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules >> are 75% >> of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or >> 15,375 feet >> AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high >> enough >> to keep everyone happy. >> >> Directions: >> We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers >> launch >> site. At this web URL, there are two directions. >> http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm >> >> We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create any >> more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. The >> firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have a >> fire >> Friday and Saturday evening after dusk. Join us for some rocket talk and >> good >> times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some >> firewood. >> We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally >> get to >> watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us have >> been >> out there till 3am and later. >> >> New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch site, >> and >> has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to be >> prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, sunburns >> can >> happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And >> sun-screen, >> sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties >> available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site to >> learn >> more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we expect >> to >> have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to the >> site. >> http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm >> >> We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running of >> the >> event. >> >> Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare you >> and >> your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or >> hot, >> water is >> so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you >> bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group >> healthy. >> >> Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to >> have >> one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day >> and >> that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. >> >> Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at 9:30am >> Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th through >> 18th. >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> >> OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - >> OREGONROCKETRY - >> ROCKETOBER >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Mon Oct 12 16:42:48 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (steve-c at ix.netcom.com) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:42:48 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) Message-ID: <17765333.1255390968773.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Roy? Rob? Help this guy out and be a good "L3 buddy". /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Andrew Greenberg >Sent: Oct 12, 2009 4:38 PM >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) > >Hi everyone, > >We're still looking for an L3 person to help us launch this Sunday at >Rocketober. We have a CTI N2500 reload that's got our name on it at >Giant Leap, and a Aerotech 98 mm case, and a rocket all ready to go, but >we don't have a L3 person to help us launch it this weekend. We hope to >get some of our members L3 certified this spring/summer, but for now, >we're really hoping someone will be able to help us out. > >If you have a L3, and will be at Rocketober this Sunday, could you drop >me a line as soon as you can? > >Thanks! > >Andrew > >-- >------------------------------------------------------- >Andrew Greenberg > >Portland State Aerospace Society (http://psas.pdx.edu/) >andrew at psas.pdx.edu P: 503.788.1343 C: 503.708.7711 >------------------------------------------------------- >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From cpovercg at rocketmail.com Mon Oct 12 16:58:04 2009 From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com (Robert Braibish) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:58:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) In-Reply-To: <17765333.1255390968773.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <17765333.1255390968773.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <298347.76576.qm@web112902.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Well! that clinches it for me.? If I had any doubts about going this weekend they are gone now... If I couldn't be convinced with a reasonable well thought out?rational argument?(and who could argue with rationale like that), then goad me!? Weeny, Ha!? I'll show you weeny... no wait.... that didn't come out right... oh never mind see ya all there! Robert Braibish ________________________________ From: "steve-c at ix.netcom.com" To: Andrew Greenberg ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Mon, October 12, 2009 4:42:48 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) Roy?? Rob?? Help this guy out and be a good "L3 buddy".? /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Andrew Greenberg >Sent: Oct 12, 2009 4:38 PM >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this??? weekend (!) > >Hi everyone, > >We're still looking for an L3 person to help us launch this Sunday at >Rocketober. We have a CTI N2500 reload that's got our name on it at >Giant Leap, and a Aerotech 98 mm case, and a rocket all ready to go, but >we don't have a L3 person to help us launch it this weekend. We hope to >get some of our members L3 certified this spring/summer, but for now, >we're really hoping someone will be able to help us out. > >If you have a L3, and will be at Rocketober this Sunday, could you drop >me a line as soon as you can? > >Thanks! > >Andrew > >-- >------------------------------------------------------- >Andrew Greenberg > >Portland State Aerospace Society (http://psas.pdx.edu/) >andrew at psas.pdx.edu? P: 503.788.1343? C: 503.708..7711 >------------------------------------------------------- >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From cpovercg at rocketmail.com Mon Oct 12 17:08:17 2009 From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com (Robert Braibish) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:08:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: <10661302.1255390876468.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <10661302.1255390876468.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <322693.20753.qm@web112904.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Not sure how I got my replies crossed on those postings from Steve sorry for an confusion Andrew. Robert ________________________________ From: "steve-c at ix.netcom.com" To: Gary Harris ; Greg Clark Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Mon, October 12, 2009 4:41:16 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather It won't rain on Saturday!? How do I know?? Because I just bought a commercial motor and I haven't done such in over (2) years - see y'all on the sage.? Anyone staying home because of the weather is a weeny.? /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Gary Harris >Sent: Oct 12, 2009 2:42 PM >To: Greg Clark >Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > >and the prediction of when we will see partly sunny days and showery days >changes every day, twice sofar since Robert's original post.? I'll be >hanging out Sat/Sun waiting for a window. > >most likely there will be some showers and also some clearings to fly in, >but it's hard to tell when. Once at Rocketober I flew a rocket in the late >afternoon, it was fairly clear and not cold, by the time I recovered it it >was about 35F and blowing snow sideways. > >Gary Harris > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Greg Clark" >To: "Gary Lech" >Cc: >Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:25 AM >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > >We won't cancel the launch, but if the weather's bad, there might not >be too much going UP! > >On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: >> >> Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! >> >> >> >> I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is bad. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Gary >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Krausert, Robert >> To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >> Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am >> Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >> >> >> >> >> Sir, >> We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. >> >> Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The weather >> outlook >> has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday still >> has >> 40% chance of precip. >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >> On >> Behalf Of Gary Lech >> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >> >> Hi folks, >> I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be cancelled >> at the >> last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling required >> to >> fly? >> >> Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd and >> enjoy >> the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to getting >> rid >> of me for a few days. >> >> Cheers from new guy ~ >> Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( >> http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 >> ) >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Robert Krausert >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org >> Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM >> Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket >> LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 >> >> >> We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. >> >> Weather forecast is: >> Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers >> Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers >> Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds >> Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. >> >> Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank you >> sir. >> >> Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast out >> there >> for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive changes >> in >> rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Robert Krausert >> To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM >> Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc >> ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th >> 2009 >> >> >> OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - >> OREGONROCKETRY - >> ROCKETOBER - >> >> As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to announce >> our >> Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th >> through >> 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join us >> for a >> very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific Northwest. >> You >> are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. >> >> Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry begins >> with >> OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for >> OregonRocketry. >> We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are one. >> This >> launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining >> flights. >> >> October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are >> welcome >> to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with >> TRA >> research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are >> allowed >> to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, >> and >> invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the >> prep >> area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets on >> Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. >> >> Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor days. >> Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do not >> need >> to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, and >> spend >> some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday and >> 8:00am >> to 2:00pm Sunday.. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need something >> on >> your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! >> >> Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in the >> dark. >> But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those >> glow >> sticks taped to rockets can work. The o >> nsite FSO will need to make sure >> everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before >> committing. They may have ideas. >> >> This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have some >> ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During the >> day >> and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or >> treat you >> to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep them >> at >> bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to >> contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a >> long >> day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the center >> one, >> located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. >> Also, >> consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like >> devices >> at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the >> community >> fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's >> up to >> them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. >> >> The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety >> code. >> As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit >> the >> OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and >> TRA >> websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to >> comprehend >> and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be >> reviewed >> by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If >> you are >> bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about >> stability, >> center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and >> complex >> rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. >> >> Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the public. >> We >> certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of >> fun. >> >> We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA clearance >> to >> 25,000 feet above sea level ( >> or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have >> a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules >> are 75% >> of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or >> 15,375 feet >> AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high >> enough >> to keep everyone happy. >> >> Directions: >> We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers >> launch >> site. At this web URL, there are two directions. >> http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm >> >> We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create any >> more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. The >> firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have a >> fire >> Friday and Saturday evening after dusk.. Join us for some rocket talk and >> good >> times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some >> firewood. >> We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally >> get to >> watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us have >> been >> out there till 3am and later. >> >> New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch site, >> and >> has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to be >> prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, sunburns >> can >> happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And >> sun-screen, >> sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties >> available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site to >> learn >> more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we expect >> to >> have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to the >> site. >> http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm >> >> We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running of >> the >> event. >> >> Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare you >> and >> your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or >> hot, >> water is >> so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you >> bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group >> healthy.. >> >> Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to >> have >> one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day >> and >> that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. >> >> Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at 9:30am >> Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th through >> 18th. >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> >> OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - >> OREGONROCKETRY - >> ROCKETOBER >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From cpovercg at rocketmail.com Mon Oct 12 17:18:00 2009 From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com (Robert Braibish) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:18:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) In-Reply-To: <4AD3C521.3030702@psas.pdx.edu> References: <17765333.1255390968773.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <298347.76576.qm@web112902.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4AD3C521.3030702@psas.pdx.edu> Message-ID: <152960.77609.qm@web112906.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Sorry Andrew, I am not the "Rob" that Steve is talking about.? To add to the confusion, I am not sure how it happened, but my reply was to the first email Steve sent about the weather.? I am in no position to help with your L3 other than moral support.? In fact I am (maybe) attempting my L2 this weekend myself.... Robert Braibish ________________________________ From: Andrew Greenberg To: Robert Braibish Cc: steve-c at ix.netcom.com Sent: Mon, October 12, 2009 5:09:05 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) Whew! That's GREAT, thanks, Robert! There's one last issue, however: we still have to ship the motor from Giant Leap tomorrow morning to someone with an L3 cert. Would it be OK with you if we had Tim at giant Leap ship you the motor directly? To arrive Thursday/Friday? That may be weird, however ("can we ship you a couple dozen pounds of AP? PLLeeeeasseeee???") so perhaps you could call me on my cell at 503.708.7711 and we can chat about details. Thanks again, Robert! Andrew Robert Braibish wrote: > Well! that clinches it for me.? If I had any doubts about going this > weekend they are gone now... > If I couldn't be convinced with a reasonable well thought out rational > argument (and who could argue with rationale like that), then goad me! > Weeny, Ha!? I'll show you weeny... no wait... that didn't come out > right... oh never mind see ya all there! > Robert Braibish > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* "steve-c at ix.netcom.com" > *To:* Andrew Greenberg ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > *Sent:* Mon, October 12, 2009 4:42:48 PM > *Subject:* Re: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an > L3 this weekend (!) > > Roy?? Rob?? Help this guy out and be a good "L3 buddy".? /Steve > > -----Original Message----- >>From: Andrew Greenberg > >>Sent: Oct 12, 2009 4:38 PM >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 > this? ? weekend (!) >> >>Hi everyone, >> >>We're still looking for an L3 person to help us launch this Sunday at >>Rocketober. We have a CTI N2500 reload that's got our name on it at >>Giant Leap, and a Aerotech 98 mm case, and a rocket all ready to go, but >>we don't have a L3 person to help us launch it this weekend. We hope to >>get some of our members L3 certified this spring/summer, but for now, >>we're really hoping someone will be able to help us out. >> >>If you have a L3, and will be at Rocketober this Sunday, could you drop >>me a line as soon as you can? >> >>Thanks! >> >>Andrew >> >>-- >>------------------------------------------------------- >>Andrew Greenberg >> >>Portland State Aerospace Society (http://psas.pdx.edu/) >>andrew at psas.pdx.edu ? P: 503.788.1343? C: > 503.708.7711 >>------------------------------------------------------- >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >? > -- ------------------------------------------------------- Andrew Greenberg Portland State Aerospace Society (http://psas.pdx.edu/) andrew at psas.pdx.edu? P: 503.788.1343? C: 503.708.7711 ------------------------------------------------------- From tomjerry1 at dishmail.net Mon Oct 12 17:35:14 2009 From: tomjerry1 at dishmail.net (Roy Jenkins) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:35:14 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3this weekend (!) References: <17765333.1255390968773.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <82869F4953114B71ADD42CF828674D37@roy4700> Steve,&PSU crew I would be glad to be an L3 buddy but I won't be there Sunday, if your there Fri or Sat. look me up. Andrew are you sure Tim can get the reload to you in time? Roy From joebevier at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 17:51:05 2009 From: joebevier at gmail.com (Joe Bevier) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:51:05 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: <322693.20753.qm@web112904.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <10661302.1255390876468.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <322693.20753.qm@web112904.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <45717540910121751j68e28d33t218934124ecb2456@mail.gmail.com> I will be there with the OROC GSE trailer in tow. What time do we want the trailer out there Friday? Steve, I'm with you anybody who chickens out because of weather is a weenie. Robert, I have a 38/720 loaner motor from the Pres.. Jeff Moore I have a DVD of Tsolo's images from Sheridan for you to add to the website. I can smell the sage already. -Joe On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Robert Braibish wrote: > Not sure how I got my replies crossed on those postings from Steve sorry > for an confusion Andrew. > > Robert > > > > > ________________________________ > From: "steve-c at ix.netcom.com" > To: Gary Harris ; Greg Clark > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Sent: Mon, October 12, 2009 4:41:16 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > It won't rain on Saturday! How do I know? Because I just bought a > commercial motor and I haven't done such in over (2) years - see y'all on > the sage. Anyone staying home because of the weather is a weeny. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Gary Harris > >Sent: Oct 12, 2009 2:42 PM > >To: Greg Clark > >Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > >and the prediction of when we will see partly sunny days and showery days > >changes every day, twice sofar since Robert's original post. I'll be > >hanging out Sat/Sun waiting for a window. > > > >most likely there will be some showers and also some clearings to fly in, > >but it's hard to tell when. Once at Rocketober I flew a rocket in the late > >afternoon, it was fairly clear and not cold, by the time I recovered it it > >was about 35F and blowing snow sideways. > > > >Gary Harris > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Greg Clark" > >To: "Gary Lech" > >Cc: > >Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:25 AM > >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > > > >We won't cancel the launch, but if the weather's bad, there might not > >be too much going UP! > > > >On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: > >> > >> Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! > >> > >> > >> > >> I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is bad. > >> > >> > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> Gary > >> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Krausert, Robert > >> To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> > >> Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am > >> Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Sir, > >> We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. > >> > >> Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The weather > >> outlook > >> has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday > still > >> has > >> 40% chance of precip. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Robert > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: > rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > >> On > >> Behalf Of Gary Lech > >> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM > >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > >> > >> Hi folks, > >> I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be > cancelled > >> at the > >> last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling > required > >> to > >> fly? > >> > >> Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd and > >> enjoy > >> the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to > getting > >> rid > >> of me for a few days. > >> > >> Cheers from new guy ~ > >> Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( > >> > http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 > >> ) > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: Robert Krausert > >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org > >> Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM > >> Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket > >> LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 > >> > >> > >> We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. > >> > >> Weather forecast is: > >> Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers > >> Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers > >> Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds > >> Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. > >> > >> Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank you > >> sir. > >> > >> Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast out > >> there > >> for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive > changes > >> in > >> rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Robert > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: Robert Krausert > >> To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM > >> Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc > >> ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th > >> 2009 > >> > >> > >> OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > >> OREGONROCKETRY - > >> ROCKETOBER - > >> > >> As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to > announce > >> our > >> Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October 16th > >> through > >> 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will join > us > >> for a > >> very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific > Northwest. > >> You > >> are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. > >> > >> Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry > begins > >> with > >> OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for > >> OregonRocketry. > >> We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are > one. > >> This > >> launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining > >> flights. > >> > >> October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are > >> welcome > >> to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance with > >> TRA > >> research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, are > >> allowed > >> to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under 18, > >> and > >> invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in the > >> prep > >> area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly rockets > on > >> Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA members. > >> > >> Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor days. > >> Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do > not > >> need > >> to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, > and > >> spend > >> some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday > and > >> 8:00am > >> to 2:00pm Sunday.. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need > something > >> on > >> your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! > >> > >> Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in the > >> dark. > >> But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. Those > >> glow > >> sticks taped to rockets can work. The o > >> nsite FSO will need to make sure > >> everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before > >> committing. They may have ideas. > >> > >> This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have > some > >> ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During > the > >> day > >> and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or > >> treat you > >> to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep > them > >> at > >> bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood to > >> contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after a > >> long > >> day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the > center > >> one, > >> located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. > >> Also, > >> consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like > >> devices > >> at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the > >> community > >> fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, that's > >> up to > >> them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. > >> > >> The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA safety > >> code. > >> As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please visit > >> the > >> OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR and > >> TRA > >> websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to > >> comprehend > >> and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be > >> reviewed > >> by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. If > >> you are > >> bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about > >> stability, > >> center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage and > >> complex > >> rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. > >> > >> Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the > public. > >> We > >> certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot of > >> fun. > >> > >> We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA > clearance > >> to > >> 25,000 feet above sea level ( > >> or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have > >> a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA rules > >> are 75% > >> of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or > >> 15,375 feet > >> AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be high > >> enough > >> to keep everyone happy. > >> > >> Directions: > >> We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers > >> launch > >> site. At this web URL, there are two directions. > >> http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm > >> > >> We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create > any > >> more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. > The > >> firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll have > a > >> fire > >> Friday and Saturday evening after dusk.. Join us for some rocket talk > and > >> good > >> times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some > >> firewood. > >> We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We normally > >> get to > >> watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us > have > >> been > >> out there till 3am and later. > >> > >> New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch > site, > >> and > >> has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need to > be > >> prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, > sunburns > >> can > >> happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And > >> sun-screen, > >> sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta potties > >> available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site > to > >> learn > >> more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we > expect > >> to > >> have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to > the > >> site. > >> http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm > >> > >> We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and running > of > >> the > >> event. > >> > >> Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare > you > >> and > >> your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold or > >> hot, > >> water is > >> so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you > >> bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group > >> healthy.. > >> > >> Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required to > >> have > >> one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per day > >> and > >> that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. > >> > >> Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at > 9:30am > >> Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th > through > >> 18th. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Robert > >> > >> OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > >> OREGONROCKETRY - > >> ROCKETOBER > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > >> > >_______________________________________________ > >Rockets mailing list > >Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Rockets mailing list > >Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > -- Joe From dmrandall at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 18:00:56 2009 From: dmrandall at gmail.com (Dave Randall) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:00:56 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6bc920e40910121800v735cf854t5de82c8d463be925@mail.gmail.com> A few fellow rocketeers and I have also discussed some type of shock absorbing material outside the e-bay. Notion being that by default, the electronics are rigid with the airframe, but some type of crush zones fore and aft of the e-bay would absorb much of the shock. Not to say that hi-g treatments are unnecessary, but would reduce the need for them, and potentially extend the margin of error. Crush zones could be coupled with some type of energy absorbing material as well. That said, there is huge difference between attempting to survive a high altitude ballistic impact, a drogue only recovery impact and the impacts in between. I could see a design that handles typical non-chute impacts, but shovel recovery, that's a whole 'nother engineering challenge. Dave From kent.newman at comcast.net Mon Oct 12 18:06:28 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:06:28 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? In-Reply-To: <6bc920e40910121800v735cf854t5de82c8d463be925@mail.gmail.com> References: <6bc920e40910121800v735cf854t5de82c8d463be925@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <000001ca4ba1$65baa8b0$312ffa10$@newman@comcast.net> My personal favorite is impact under thrust......practice, practice, practice.... Kent -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Dave Randall Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 6:01 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? A few fellow rocketeers and I have also discussed some type of shock absorbing material outside the e-bay. Notion being that by default, the electronics are rigid with the airframe, but some type of crush zones fore and aft of the e-bay would absorb much of the shock. Not to say that hi-g treatments are unnecessary, but would reduce the need for them, and potentially extend the margin of error. Crush zones could be coupled with some type of energy absorbing material as well. That said, there is huge difference between attempting to survive a high altitude ballistic impact, a drogue only recovery impact and the impacts in between. I could see a design that handles typical non-chute impacts, but shovel recovery, that's a whole 'nother engineering challenge. Dave _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From mrrominwa at yahoo.com Mon Oct 12 18:08:54 2009 From: mrrominwa at yahoo.com (dave woodard) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:08:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? In-Reply-To: <000001ca4ba1$65baa8b0$312ffa10$@newman@comcast.net> Message-ID: <698087.92837.qm@web53109.mail.re2.yahoo.com> gee just use the blackbox material it survive airliners clashing ???????????????????????????????????????? dave ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? --- On Mon, 10/12/09, Kent Newman wrote: From: Kent Newman Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? To: "'Dave Randall'" , Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 6:06 PM My personal favorite is impact under thrust......practice, practice, practice.... Kent -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Dave Randall Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 6:01 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? A few fellow rocketeers and I have also discussed some type of shock absorbing material outside the e-bay.? Notion being that by default, the electronics are rigid with the airframe, but some type of crush zones fore and aft of the e-bay would absorb much of the shock.? Not to say that hi-g treatments are unnecessary, but would reduce the need for them, and potentially extend the margin of error. Crush zones could be coupled with some type of energy absorbing material as well. That said, there is huge difference between attempting to survive a high altitude ballistic impact, a drogue only recovery impact and the impacts in between.? I could see a design that handles typical non-chute impacts, but shovel recovery, that's a whole 'nother engineering challenge. Dave _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ? From cpovercg at rocketmail.com Mon Oct 12 18:15:21 2009 From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com (cpovercg at rocketmail.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 01:15:21 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronicsbay? In-Reply-To: <6bc920e40910121800v735cf854t5de82c8d463be925@mail.gmail.com> References: <6bc920e40910121800v735cf854t5de82c8d463be925@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <73715894-1255396524-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1508930114-@bda080.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> I think it comes back to do you want to trust avioics that have "survived" a crash? Down one rocket...want to make it two? Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: Dave Randall Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:00:56 To: Cc: Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? A few fellow rocketeers and I have also discussed some type of shock absorbing material outside the e-bay. Notion being that by default, the electronics are rigid with the airframe, but some type of crush zones fore and aft of the e-bay would absorb much of the shock. Not to say that hi-g treatments are unnecessary, but would reduce the need for them, and potentially extend the margin of error. Crush zones could be coupled with some type of energy absorbing material as well. That said, there is huge difference between attempting to survive a high altitude ballistic impact, a drogue only recovery impact and the impacts in between. I could see a design that handles typical non-chute impacts, but shovel recovery, that's a whole 'nother engineering challenge. Dave _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From dmrandall at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 18:56:34 2009 From: dmrandall at gmail.com (Dave Randall) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:56:34 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? Message-ID: <6bc920e40910121856h4a060733w5a2ad7e277e340d@mail.gmail.com> Not saying I would reuse... But the data from the flight would be good for forensics if it were not readily apparent what the failure condition was. Depending on the condition though and assuming it passes testing I might fly it as a backup. On Monday, October 12, 2009, wrote: > I think it comes back to do you want to trust avioics that have "survived" a crash? ?Down one rocket...want to make it two? > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Randall > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:00:56 > To: > Cc: > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > ? ? ? ?bay? > > A few fellow rocketeers and I have also discussed some type of shock > absorbing material outside the e-bay. ?Notion being that by default, > the electronics are rigid with the airframe, but some type of crush > zones fore and aft of the e-bay would absorb much of the shock. ?Not > to say that hi-g treatments are unnecessary, but would reduce the need > for them, and potentially extend the margin of error. > > Crush zones could be coupled with some type of energy absorbing > material as well. > > That said, there is huge difference between attempting to survive a > high altitude ballistic impact, a drogue only recovery impact and the > impacts in between. ?I could see a design that handles typical > non-chute impacts, but shovel recovery, that's a whole 'nother > engineering challenge. > > Dave > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > -- - Dave From sb at berfield.com Mon Oct 12 18:58:26 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:58:26 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronicsbay? Message-ID: <200910130158.n9D1wQ9D000457@omr5.networksolutionsemail.com> Probably not a hard one, but maybe. My main gosl would be to try to recover at least some data. Hard to do when all the chips are stripped off the board. -----Original Message----- From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 6:15 PM To: Dave Randall ; rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com; Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: RocketsNW Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronicsbay? I think it comes back to do you want to trust avioics that have "survived" a crash? Down one rocket...want to make it two? Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: Dave Randall Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:00:56 To: Cc: Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? A few fellow rocketeers and I have also discussed some type of shock absorbing material outside the e-bay. Notion being that by default, the electronics are rigid with the airframe, but some type of crush zones fore and aft of the e-bay would absorb much of the shock. Not to say that hi-g treatments are unnecessary, but would reduce the need for them, and potentially extend the margin of error. Crush zones could be coupled with some type of energy absorbing material as well. That said, there is huge difference between attempting to survive a high altitude ballistic impact, a drogue only recovery impact and the impacts in between. I could see a design that handles typical non-chute impacts, but shovel recovery, that's a whole 'nother engineering challenge. Dave _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Mon Oct 12 19:03:54 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:03:54 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? Message-ID: <200910130203.n9D23ujW020062@omr16.networksolutionsemail.com> I believe the accepted material is unobtanium. -----Original Message----- From: dave woodard Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 6:08 PM To: 'Dave Randall' ; Mfreptiles at aol.com; Kent Newman Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? gee just use the blackbox material it survive airliners clashing ???????????????????????????????????????? dave ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? --- On Mon, 10/12/09, Kent Newman wrote: From: Kent Newman Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? To: "'Dave Randall'" , Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 6:06 PM My personal favorite is impact under thrust......practice, practice, practice.... Kent -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Dave Randall Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 6:01 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? A few fellow rocketeers and I have also discussed some type of shock absorbing material outside the e-bay.? Notion being that by default, the electronics are rigid with the airframe, but some type of crush zones fore and aft of the e-bay would absorb much of the shock.? Not to say that hi-g treatments are unnecessary, but would reduce the need for them, and potentially extend the margin of error. Crush zones could be coupled with some type of energy absorbing material as well. That said, there is huge difference between attempting to survive a high altitude ballistic impact, a drogue only recovery impact and the impacts in between.? I could see a design that handles typical non-chute impacts, but shovel recovery, that's a whole 'nother engineering challenge. Dave _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Mon Oct 12 19:04:27 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:04:27 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? Message-ID: <200910130204.n9D24SY3007848@omr5.networksolutionsemail.com> I'll have to work on that one -----Original Message----- From: Kent Newman Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 6:06 PM To: 'Dave Randall' ; Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? My personal favorite is impact under thrust......practice, practice, practice.... Kent -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Dave Randall Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 6:01 PM To: Mfreptiles at aol.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? A few fellow rocketeers and I have also discussed some type of shock absorbing material outside the e-bay. Notion being that by default, the electronics are rigid with the airframe, but some type of crush zones fore and aft of the e-bay would absorb much of the shock. Not to say that hi-g treatments are unnecessary, but would reduce the need for them, and potentially extend the margin of error. Crush zones could be coupled with some type of energy absorbing material as well. That said, there is huge difference between attempting to survive a high altitude ballistic impact, a drogue only recovery impact and the impacts in between. I could see a design that handles typical non-chute impacts, but shovel recovery, that's a whole 'nother engineering challenge. Dave _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 19:16:25 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:16:25 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronicsbay? References: <6bc920e40910121856h4a060733w5a2ad7e277e340d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7CD4BD1175E3411391FC9AE7183C0345@LaptopKrausert> My shred in July was flown with an Altacc2. Looked fine after recovery, even though the ebay was a mess. Then I downloaded the data and at first it all seemed ok. Hit 1147 fps @ 4.7 seconds. Hit maximum altitude @ 5.1 seconds of over 5000 feet. And a modest 26 g's at max. Everything seemed cool. Never an altimeter I'd use again for recovery, but maybe for data. Then my mind started thinking. Crazy as it sounds. But then I started doing the math. To have been at 5K feet after 5.1 seconds, the rocket needed to average 1000 fps. Off the pad, there is no way it was 1000 fps. This was on a K250. I could believe 4000 feet. The 5/8th Kevlar tape was torn in half. A lot of force to snap that. But I still have trouble believing the broken aft under thrust and forward sections playing tug-of-war could have tossed the forward section a 1000 feet in 0.3 seconds. So, my best guess - the Altecc accuracy is off by ~20%. That's only a guess. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Randall" To: Cc: ; "RocketsNW" Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 6:56 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronicsbay? Not saying I would reuse... But the data from the flight would be good for forensics if it were not readily apparent what the failure condition was. Depending on the condition though and assuming it passes testing I might fly it as a backup. On Monday, October 12, 2009, wrote: > I think it comes back to do you want to trust avioics that have "survived" > a crash? Down one rocket...want to make it two? > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Randall > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:00:56 > To: > Cc: > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > bay? > > A few fellow rocketeers and I have also discussed some type of shock > absorbing material outside the e-bay. Notion being that by default, > the electronics are rigid with the airframe, but some type of crush > zones fore and aft of the e-bay would absorb much of the shock. Not > to say that hi-g treatments are unnecessary, but would reduce the need > for them, and potentially extend the margin of error. > > Crush zones could be coupled with some type of energy absorbing > material as well. > > That said, there is huge difference between attempting to survive a > high altitude ballistic impact, a drogue only recovery impact and the > impacts in between. I could see a design that handles typical > non-chute impacts, but shovel recovery, that's a whole 'nother > engineering challenge. > > Dave > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > -- - Dave _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From t.j.doll at att.net Mon Oct 12 19:37:52 2009 From: t.j.doll at att.net (t.j.doll at att.net) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 02:37:52 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof Message-ID: <101320090237.10221.4AD3E800000C14CD000027ED22228869349B0A02D29B9B0EBF0404010BD206D29B@att.net> Empty beer cans. Seriously (well, sort of) - they have very good crush characteristics and don't weigh much. For some more protection, fill them with that expanding foam stuff. Soda pop cans would also work, but be less fun :-) Although I doubt you can make a practical design for something like a power prang or a coming in ballistic from several thousand feet. BTW, the superball material would be a bad idea - anything that 'bounces' will actually increase the peak acceleration due to the 'bounce'. You want something that compresses, but doesn't rebound. Tim >A few fellow rocketeers and I have also discussed some type of shock >absorbing material outside the e-bay. Notion being that by default, >the electronics are rigid with the airframe, but some type of crush >zones fore and aft of the e-bay would absorb much of the shock. Not >to say that hi-g treatments are unnecessary, but would reduce the need >for them, and potentially extend the margin of error. > >Crush zones could be coupled with some type of energy absorbing >material as well. From jhadv at pacifier.com Mon Oct 12 19:40:13 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (jhadv at pacifier.com) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:40:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Rockets Digest, Vol 21, Issue 66 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <49249.209.253.79.135.1255401613.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> "but shovel recovery, that's a whole 'nother engineering challenge." I believe they refer to them as bunker busters or earth penetrators. Sounds invasive doesn't it? From jhadv at pacifier.com Mon Oct 12 19:53:29 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (jhadv at pacifier.com) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:53:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a...... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <49294.209.253.79.135.1255402409.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> "Then my mind started thinking." Yes when one does the math a lot of rocket lore seems highly improbable. Mr. Scary excepted of course. Quite the understated man. I would still like to meet the chump urrrr, I mean machinest with that much extra time and money that will launch his minimum diameter 54mm M. We all know that when he says M he means baby N with a total butn time of less than a second. From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 20:02:50 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:02:50 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: <45717540910121751j68e28d33t218934124ecb2456@mail.gmail.com> References: <10661302.1255390876468.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <322693.20753.qm@web112904.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <45717540910121751j68e28d33t218934124ecb2456@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Joe ???? a 38mm 720 loaner for Robert B.? I have one for him from Dennis W.... Got my head scratching habit in motion on this one. Unless he is planning to launch a 38mm cluster or staged rocket. Arg maities weez takes wutz weez kan N givz nutn bak! On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Joe Bevier wrote: > I will be there with the OROC GSE trailer in tow. What time do we want the > trailer out there Friday? > Steve, I'm with you anybody who chickens out because of weather is a > weenie. > Robert, I have a 38/720 loaner motor from the Pres.. > Jeff Moore I have a DVD of Tsolo's images from Sheridan for you to add to > the website. > > I can smell the sage already. > > -Joe > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Robert Braibish >wrote: > > > Not sure how I got my replies crossed on those postings from Steve sorry > > for an confusion Andrew. > > > > Robert > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: "steve-c at ix.netcom.com" > > To: Gary Harris ; Greg Clark > > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > > Sent: Mon, October 12, 2009 4:41:16 PM > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > > It won't rain on Saturday! How do I know? Because I just bought a > > commercial motor and I haven't done such in over (2) years - see y'all on > > the sage. Anyone staying home because of the weather is a weeny. /Steve > > > > -----Original Message----- > > >From: Gary Harris > > >Sent: Oct 12, 2009 2:42 PM > > >To: Greg Clark > > >Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > > >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > > > >and the prediction of when we will see partly sunny days and showery > days > > >changes every day, twice sofar since Robert's original post. I'll be > > >hanging out Sat/Sun waiting for a window. > > > > > >most likely there will be some showers and also some clearings to fly > in, > > >but it's hard to tell when. Once at Rocketober I flew a rocket in the > late > > >afternoon, it was fairly clear and not cold, by the time I recovered it > it > > >was about 35F and blowing snow sideways. > > > > > >Gary Harris > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Greg Clark" > > >To: "Gary Lech" > > >Cc: > > >Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:25 AM > > >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > > > > > > >We won't cancel the launch, but if the weather's bad, there might not > > >be too much going UP! > > > > > >On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: > > >> > > >> Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is bad. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> > > >> Gary > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Krausert, Robert > > >> To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > > >> > > >> Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am > > >> Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Sir, > > >> We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. > > >> > > >> Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The > weather > > >> outlook > > >> has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday > > still > > >> has > > >> 40% chance of precip. > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Robert > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: > > rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > > >> On > > >> Behalf Of Gary Lech > > >> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM > > >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > > >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > >> > > >> Hi folks, > > >> I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be > > cancelled > > >> at the > > >> last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling > > required > > >> to > > >> fly? > > >> > > >> Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd > and > > >> enjoy > > >> the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to > > getting > > >> rid > > >> of me for a few days. > > >> > > >> Cheers from new guy ~ > > >> Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( > > >> > > > http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 > > >> ) > > >> > > >> > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> From: Robert Krausert > > >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org > > >> Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM > > >> Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket > > >> LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 > > >> > > >> > > >> We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. > > >> > > >> Weather forecast is: > > >> Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers > > >> Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers > > >> Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds > > >> Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. > > >> > > >> Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank > you > > >> sir. > > >> > > >> Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast > out > > >> there > > >> for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive > > changes > > >> in > > >> rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Robert > > >> > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> From: Robert Krausert > > >> To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > > >> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM > > >> Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc > > >> ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th > > >> 2009 > > >> > > >> > > >> OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > > >> OREGONROCKETRY - > > >> ROCKETOBER - > > >> > > >> As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to > > announce > > >> our > > >> Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October > 16th > > >> through > > >> 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will > join > > us > > >> for a > > >> very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific > > Northwest. > > >> You > > >> are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. > > >> > > >> Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry > > begins > > >> with > > >> OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for > > >> OregonRocketry. > > >> We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are > > one. > > >> This > > >> launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining > > >> flights. > > >> > > >> October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are > > >> welcome > > >> to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance > with > > >> TRA > > >> research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, > are > > >> allowed > > >> to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under > 18, > > >> and > > >> invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in > the > > >> prep > > >> area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly > rockets > > on > > >> Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA > members. > > >> > > >> Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor > days. > > >> Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You do > > not > > >> need > > >> to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and motors, > > and > > >> spend > > >> some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday > > and > > >> 8:00am > > >> to 2:00pm Sunday.. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need > > something > > >> on > > >> your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! > > >> > > >> Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in > the > > >> dark. > > >> But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. > Those > > >> glow > > >> sticks taped to rockets can work. The o > > >> nsite FSO will need to make sure > > >> everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before > > >> committing. They may have ideas. > > >> > > >> This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have > > some > > >> ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During > > the > > >> day > > >> and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or > > >> treat you > > >> to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep > > them > > >> at > > >> bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood > to > > >> contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes after > a > > >> long > > >> day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the > > center > > >> one, > > >> located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to share. > > >> Also, > > >> consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee like > > >> devices > > >> at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at the > > >> community > > >> fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, > that's > > >> up to > > >> them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. > > >> > > >> The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA > safety > > >> code. > > >> As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please > visit > > >> the > > >> OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR > and > > >> TRA > > >> websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to > > >> comprehend > > >> and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will be > > >> reviewed > > >> by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. > If > > >> you are > > >> bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about > > >> stability, > > >> center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage > and > > >> complex > > >> rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. > > >> > > >> Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the > > public. > > >> We > > >> certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot > of > > >> fun. > > >> > > >> We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA > > clearance > > >> to > > >> 25,000 feet above sea level ( > > >> or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have > > >> a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA > rules > > >> are 75% > > >> of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or > > >> 15,375 feet > > >> AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be > high > > >> enough > > >> to keep everyone happy. > > >> > > >> Directions: > > >> We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the Brothers > > >> launch > > >> site. At this web URL, there are two directions. > > >> http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm > > >> > > >> We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not create > > any > > >> more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new ones. > > The > > >> firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll > have > > a > > >> fire > > >> Friday and Saturday evening after dusk.. Join us for some rocket talk > > and > > >> good > > >> times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some > > >> firewood. > > >> We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We > normally > > >> get to > > >> watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us > > have > > >> been > > >> out there till 3am and later. > > >> > > >> New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch > > site, > > >> and > > >> has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need > to > > be > > >> prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, > > sunburns > > >> can > > >> happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And > > >> sun-screen, > > >> sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta > potties > > >> available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web site > > to > > >> learn > > >> more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we > > expect > > >> to > > >> have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact to > > the > > >> site. > > >> http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm > > >> > > >> We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and > running > > of > > >> the > > >> event. > > >> > > >> Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. Prepare > > you > > >> and > > >> your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold > or > > >> hot, > > >> water is > > >> so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you > > >> bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group > > >> healthy.. > > >> > > >> Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required > to > > >> have > > >> one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per > day > > >> and > > >> that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. > > >> > > >> Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at > > 9:30am > > >> Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th > > through > > >> 18th. > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Robert > > >> > > >> OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > > >> OREGONROCKETRY - > > >> ROCKETOBER > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Rockets mailing list > > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Rockets mailing list > > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Rockets mailing list > > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > >> > > >> > > >_______________________________________________ > > >Rockets mailing list > > >Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >Rockets mailing list > > >Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > -- > Joe > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 20:09:28 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:09:28 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronicsbay? In-Reply-To: <7CD4BD1175E3411391FC9AE7183C0345@LaptopKrausert> References: <6bc920e40910121856h4a060733w5a2ad7e277e340d@mail.gmail.com> <7CD4BD1175E3411391FC9AE7183C0345@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: What about building not only for lawn darting but for say a launching force some what like a Mike F. 54mm M? On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Robert Krausert wrote: > My shred in July was flown with an Altacc2. Looked fine after recovery, > even though the ebay was a mess. Then I downloaded the data and at first it > all seemed ok. Hit 1147 fps @ 4.7 seconds. Hit maximum altitude @ 5.1 > seconds of over 5000 feet. And a modest 26 g's at max. Everything seemed > cool. Never an altimeter I'd use again for recovery, but maybe for data. > > Then my mind started thinking. Crazy as it sounds. But then I started doing > the math. To have been at 5K feet after 5.1 seconds, the rocket needed to > average 1000 fps. Off the pad, there is no way it was 1000 fps. This was on > a K250. I could believe 4000 feet. > > The 5/8th Kevlar tape was torn in half. A lot of force to snap that. But I > still have trouble believing the broken aft under thrust and forward > sections playing tug-of-war could have tossed the forward section a 1000 > feet in 0.3 seconds. > > So, my best guess - the Altecc accuracy is off by ~20%. That's only a > guess. > > Cheers, > Robert > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Randall" > To: > Cc: ; "RocketsNW" > Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 6:56 PM > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof > electronicsbay? > > > Not saying I would reuse... But the data from the flight would be good > for forensics if it were not readily apparent what the failure > condition was. Depending on the condition though and assuming it > passes testing I might fly it as a backup. > > On Monday, October 12, 2009, wrote: > >> I think it comes back to do you want to trust avioics that have "survived" >> a crash? Down one rocket...want to make it two? >> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Dave Randall >> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:00:56 >> To: >> Cc: >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics >> bay? >> >> A few fellow rocketeers and I have also discussed some type of shock >> absorbing material outside the e-bay. Notion being that by default, >> the electronics are rigid with the airframe, but some type of crush >> zones fore and aft of the e-bay would absorb much of the shock. Not >> to say that hi-g treatments are unnecessary, but would reduce the need >> for them, and potentially extend the margin of error. >> >> Crush zones could be coupled with some type of energy absorbing >> material as well. >> >> That said, there is huge difference between attempting to survive a >> high altitude ballistic impact, a drogue only recovery impact and the >> impacts in between. I could see a design that handles typical >> non-chute impacts, but shovel recovery, that's a whole 'nother >> engineering challenge. >> >> Dave >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> > -- > - Dave > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 20:28:39 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:28:39 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronicsbay? References: <6bc920e40910121856h4a060733w5a2ad7e277e340d@mail.gmail.com> <7CD4BD1175E3411391FC9AE7183C0345@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: <96BBE6772B7B48F0820A37D83C724017@LaptopKrausert> How did 1147 fps go to 3500 fps? Geez!!! I had enough time with commercial. Dropping in a Fisher M would be I hope the "FSO reject my flight please." I would love to some day. But next year will be a continuation of the K250 flights. Maybe when I have time to work with the local FG mill to fabricate by an all aluminum airframe and welded fins. Before I stick a Fisher motor up my rocket, I better have learned several flights in mach 1 and 2 first. Mach 2 is rare. I think I've only read a couple. Let's just say I might be asking Fisher's grandkids to whip me up a batch when I'm ready. And for the record... I've never lawndarted a rocket. I've had two crashed, no darts. Both were open, but maybe not in one piece. I just liked that email address. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: Christopher Guenther To: Robert Krausert Cc: Dave Randall ; cpovercg at rocketmail.com ; rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com ; RocketsNW Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 8:09 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronicsbay? What about building not only for lawn darting but for say a launching force some what like a Mike F. 54mm M? On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Robert Krausert wrote: My shred in July was flown with an Altacc2. Looked fine after recovery, even though the ebay was a mess. Then I downloaded the data and at first it all seemed ok. Hit 1147 fps @ 4.7 seconds. Hit maximum altitude @ 5.1 seconds of over 5000 feet. And a modest 26 g's at max. Everything seemed cool. Never an altimeter I'd use again for recovery, but maybe for data. Then my mind started thinking. Crazy as it sounds. But then I started doing the math. To have been at 5K feet after 5.1 seconds, the rocket needed to average 1000 fps. Off the pad, there is no way it was 1000 fps. This was on a K250. I could believe 4000 feet. The 5/8th Kevlar tape was torn in half. A lot of force to snap that. But I still have trouble believing the broken aft under thrust and forward sections playing tug-of-war could have tossed the forward section a 1000 feet in 0.3 seconds. So, my best guess - the Altecc accuracy is off by ~20%. That's only a guess. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Randall" To: Cc: ; "RocketsNW" Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 6:56 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronicsbay? Not saying I would reuse... But the data from the flight would be good for forensics if it were not readily apparent what the failure condition was. Depending on the condition though and assuming it passes testing I might fly it as a backup. On Monday, October 12, 2009, wrote: I think it comes back to do you want to trust avioics that have "survived" a crash? Down one rocket...want to make it two? Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: Dave Randall Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:00:56 To: Cc: Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics bay? A few fellow rocketeers and I have also discussed some type of shock absorbing material outside the e-bay. Notion being that by default, the electronics are rigid with the airframe, but some type of crush zones fore and aft of the e-bay would absorb much of the shock. Not to say that hi-g treatments are unnecessary, but would reduce the need for them, and potentially extend the margin of error. Crush zones could be coupled with some type of energy absorbing material as well. That said, there is huge difference between attempting to survive a high altitude ballistic impact, a drogue only recovery impact and the impacts in between. I could see a design that handles typical non-chute impacts, but shovel recovery, that's a whole 'nother engineering challenge. Dave _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets -- - Dave _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From mikeandkimwyvel at comcast.net Mon Oct 12 20:38:37 2009 From: mikeandkimwyvel at comcast.net (mikeandkimwyvel) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:38:37 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] WAC October Launch Announcement Message-ID: <000a01ca4bb6$a6700250$f35006f0$@net> Hello out there in rocket land. The ides of October are upon us which means the WAC October launch is just around the corner. Here's the details. When: Friday*, Saturday, and Sunday October 23 - 25th Where: The Sportsmans Club in Mansfield Washington Time: 8AM to 6PM. Night launch Saturday* Launch Director: Mike Wyvel and Robert Simpson Clark I'm asking for a volunteer to haul the trailer from Federal Way to the launch site and back. In the past we've had a large turnout and have needed all our equipment. Robert Winglee will also be bringing his UW students over again. If I don't get a volunteer then I'll only be bringing as much GSE as I can carry. There will be at least two launches from the away cell so it looks to be an exciting weekend. Puget Sound Propulsion will be onsite. However they will only be bringing pre-orders and will not be selling any reloads at the launch. Be sure to contact them soon to make sure they have what you need. As is the case for every launch we need volunteers for launch duties. I've asked Greg Deputy to clear out the launch duty signup sheet at http://www.northwestrocketry.com/default.asp?page=http://www.northwestrocket ry.com/launchsignup.asp. We won't be needing the full complement of positions for the October launch, just a RSO, LCO, and pad manager for each shift. The range will only open once all the shifts are filled. We also need people to help set up and take down the range. By popular demand we'll activate the waiver on Friday so folks that show up early can launch some rockets. This is contingent on someone able to haul the GSE to the launch site and set up with enough time to launch. The waiver will be open for night launching on Saturday should anyone desire. Rockets must conform to the NAR safety rules for night launches. Camping will be available onsite. From the long range forecast it looks like we might have a shot at decent, if cold, weather. Lodging is available in Waterville and Chelan as an alternative. We will also have porta pottys on site. That's it for now. See you all soon. Mike and Robert From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 21:00:30 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:00:30 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronicsbay? In-Reply-To: <96BBE6772B7B48F0820A37D83C724017@LaptopKrausert> References: <6bc920e40910121856h4a060733w5a2ad7e277e340d@mail.gmail.com> <7CD4BD1175E3411391FC9AE7183C0345@LaptopKrausert> <96BBE6772B7B48F0820A37D83C724017@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: Missing my point I hope to some day (years from now) be ready to use a Mike F. M motor. and am looking for ways to shield the electronics from the force his M punches with. Build and test the Idea's now and all along the way till I am ready with a design. (many years down the road) On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 8:28 PM, Robert Krausert wrote: > How did 1147 fps go to 3500 fps? Geez!!! I had enough time with > commercial. Dropping in a Fisher M would be I hope the "FSO reject my flight > please." I would love to some day. But next year will be a continuation of > the K250 flights. Maybe when I have time to work with the local FG mill to > fabricate by an all aluminum airframe and welded fins. Before I stick a > Fisher motor up my rocket, I better have learned several flights in mach 1 > and 2 first. Mach 2 is rare. I think I've only read a couple. Let's just say > I might be asking Fisher's grandkids to whip me up a batch when I'm ready. > > And for the record... I've never lawndarted a rocket. I've had two crashed, > no darts. Both were open, but maybe not in one piece. I just liked that > email address. > > Cheers, > Robert > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Christopher Guenther > *To:* Robert Krausert > *Cc:* Dave Randall ; cpovercg at rocketmail.com ; > rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com ; RocketsNW > *Sent:* Monday, October 12, 2009 8:09 PM > *Subject:* Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof > electronicsbay? > > What about building not only for lawn darting but for say a launching force > some what like a Mike F. 54mm M? > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Robert Krausert < > lawndart.robert at gmail.com> wrote: > >> My shred in July was flown with an Altacc2. Looked fine after recovery, >> even though the ebay was a mess. Then I downloaded the data and at first it >> all seemed ok. Hit 1147 fps @ 4.7 seconds. Hit maximum altitude @ 5.1 >> seconds of over 5000 feet. And a modest 26 g's at max. Everything seemed >> cool. Never an altimeter I'd use again for recovery, but maybe for data. >> >> Then my mind started thinking. Crazy as it sounds. But then I started >> doing the math. To have been at 5K feet after 5.1 seconds, the rocket needed >> to average 1000 fps. Off the pad, there is no way it was 1000 fps. This was >> on a K250. I could believe 4000 feet. >> >> The 5/8th Kevlar tape was torn in half. A lot of force to snap that. But I >> still have trouble believing the broken aft under thrust and forward >> sections playing tug-of-war could have tossed the forward section a 1000 >> feet in 0.3 seconds. >> >> So, my best guess - the Altecc accuracy is off by ~20%. That's only a >> guess. >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Randall" >> To: >> Cc: ; "RocketsNW" >> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 6:56 PM >> >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof >> electronicsbay? >> >> >> Not saying I would reuse... But the data from the flight would be good >> for forensics if it were not readily apparent what the failure >> condition was. Depending on the condition though and assuming it >> passes testing I might fly it as a backup. >> >> On Monday, October 12, 2009, wrote: >> >>> I think it comes back to do you want to trust avioics that have >>> "survived" a crash? Down one rocket...want to make it two? >>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Dave Randall >>> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:00:56 >>> To: >>> Cc: >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics >>> bay? >>> >>> A few fellow rocketeers and I have also discussed some type of shock >>> absorbing material outside the e-bay. Notion being that by default, >>> the electronics are rigid with the airframe, but some type of crush >>> zones fore and aft of the e-bay would absorb much of the shock. Not >>> to say that hi-g treatments are unnecessary, but would reduce the need >>> for them, and potentially extend the margin of error. >>> >>> Crush zones could be coupled with some type of energy absorbing >>> material as well. >>> >>> That said, there is huge difference between attempting to survive a >>> high altitude ballistic impact, a drogue only recovery impact and the >>> impacts in between. I could see a design that handles typical >>> non-chute impacts, but shovel recovery, that's a whole 'nother >>> engineering challenge. >>> >>> Dave >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> - Dave >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > > From cpovercg at rocketmail.com Mon Oct 12 21:19:51 2009 From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com (Robert Braibish) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:19:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] posting pics on rocketsnw Message-ID: <742995.61245.qm@web112904.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Is the login and password needed to upload pictures on rocketsnw the same as the one for the forum? if not, where do we set up an account?? I can post pics and I have tried my password and username for the newsgroup with no luck.? Any help for a first time poster? Robert Braibish From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Mon Oct 12 21:36:23 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:36:23 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] posting pics on rocketsnw References: <742995.61245.qm@web112904.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Covered ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Braibish" To: Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:19 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] posting pics on rocketsnw Is the login and password needed to upload pictures on rocketsnw the same as the one for the forum? if not, where do we set up an account? I can post pics and I have tried my password and username for the newsgroup with no luck. Any help for a first time poster? Robert Braibish _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Mfreptiles at aol.com Mon Oct 12 22:10:57 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 01:10:57 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronicsbay? Message-ID: I darted Mr. Scary once. Electronics survived and got flown again. The negative g's upon impact were less than the launch g's. Probably due to the sharp cone and soft Brothers soil. It took about an hour to dig it out though. That sold me on encasing the altimeter in aluminum tubing. My current e-bay design uses a 2 grain 38mm motor casing with snap ring retention. Sealed up just like a motor, except for one hole for the baro sensor. Mike F. In a message dated 10/12/2009 8:29:35 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, lawndart.robert at gmail.com writes: And for the record... I've never lawndarted a rocket. I've had two crashed, no darts. Both were open, but maybe not in one piece. I just liked that email address. From cpovercg at rocketmail.com Mon Oct 12 22:14:43 2009 From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com (Robert Braibish) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 22:14:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) In-Reply-To: <25453518.1255395858817.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <25453518.1255395858817.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <39824.10999.qm@web112913.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Last rocketober was a good launch.? I was there with both my wife and son CAMPING! hard-core, tent & all.? The digital thermometer read 11 degrees Saturday night.? I knew right then that if my wife suck with me for the whole weekend that she really did love me!? Well, the 20 years of marriage is a pretty good indicator too.? My sons weekend was not so good his brand new Comanche III?cato'd on it's maiden voyage.? We figured the D motor had too many temperature highs and lows.? My wife took a pretty spectacular picture - it might look like it survived the blast but it pushed the two remaining motors up into the body tube and they burned things up and the whole thing fell to earth, bounced off a canopy onto a nearby pickup. I've seen some pretty tragic losses in the year or so I have been in the hobby, literally thousands of dollars lost in the fraction of a second, but this was the hardest... but disturbingly cool to see.? I'm just glad my son can laugh about it now...I posted some pics to rocketsnw, memories of Rocketober '08. Robert Braibish ________________________________ From: "steve-c at ix.netcom.com" To: Robert Braibish ; Andrew Greenberg ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Mon, October 12, 2009 6:04:18 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) Good for you!? The OROC October launches are always good - even last year in sub-freezing temps with snow on the sage it was fun.? I can't imagine this year will be any worse.? /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Robert Braibish >Sent: Oct 12, 2009 4:58 PM >To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com, Andrew Greenberg , rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) > > >Well! that clinches it for me.? If I had any doubts about going this weekend they are gone now... >If I couldn't be convinced with a reasonable well thought out?rational argument?(and who could argue with rationale like that), then goad me!? >Weeny, Ha!? I'll show you weeny... no wait... that didn't come out right... oh never mind see ya all there! > >Robert Braibish > > > > ________________________________ From: "steve-c at ix.netcom.com" >To: Andrew Greenberg ; rockets at rocketsnw.com >Sent: Mon, October 12, 2009 4:42:48 PM >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) > >Roy?? Rob?? Help this guy out and be a good "L3 buddy".? /Steve > >-----Original Message----- >>From: Andrew Greenberg >>Sent: Oct 12, 2009 4:38 PM >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this??? weekend (!) >> >>Hi everyone, >> >>We're still looking for an L3 person to help us launch this Sunday at >>Rocketober. We have a CTI N2500 reload that's got our name on it at >>Giant Leap, and a Aerotech 98 mm case, and a rocket all ready to go, but >>we don't have a L3 person to help us launch it this weekend. We hope to >>get some of our members L3 certified this spring/summer, but for now, >>we're really hoping someone will be able to help us out. >> >>If you have a L3, and will be at Rocketober this Sunday, could you drop >>me a line as soon as you can? >> >>Thanks! >> >>Andrew >> >>-- >>------------------------------------------------------- >>Andrew Greenberg >> >>Portland State Aerospace Society (http://psas.pdx.edu/) >>andrew at psas.pdx.edu? P: 503.788.1343? C: 503.708.7711 >>------------------------------------------------------- >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>? > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >? > > From Mfreptiles at aol.com Mon Oct 12 22:21:17 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 01:21:17 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronicsbay? Message-ID: Just for the record............. I don't plan on offering up M motors for years to come. :) I just offered the recent one because if I wait until I build the rocket, it may never fly. I developed the motor two or three years ago so that gives you an indication of my priorities. I put it on the back burner to spend time on the 38mm L. The 54mm M was an easy design compared to the 38mm L. Mike F. In a message dated 10/12/2009 9:01:29 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, guentherchristopher at gmail.com writes: Missing my point I hope to some day (years from now) be ready to use a Mike F. M motor. From jhadv at pacifier.com Mon Oct 12 22:31:59 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (jhadv at pacifier.com) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 22:31:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Rockets Digest, Vol 21, Issue 69 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6449.76.115.45.22.1255411919.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> "My current e-bay design uses a 2 grain 38mm motor casing with snap ring retention. Sealed up just like a motor, except for one hole for the baro sensor." Nice. From rockets at sunrivernaturecenter.org Tue Oct 13 00:39:26 2009 From: rockets at sunrivernaturecenter.org (Bob Grossfeld) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 00:39:26 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone coming to the OROC launch then to WAC at Mansfield? Message-ID: Howdy, Anyone going to the Brothers launch this weekend and will also be going to the WAC launch at Mansfield? I wanted to have some motors delivered, if not, I am looking to ship some motors up to Washington to be delivered to flyers up at the WAC launch. Let me know..... Bob Sunriver Nature Center & Observatory From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Tue Oct 13 01:44:20 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 01:44:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20091012100954.00c2b728@mail.iinet.com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20091012100954.00c2b728@mail.iinet.com> Message-ID: I've been restraining my keyboard-pecking finger until now. This is where a basic physics course comes in handy. A quick calculation of the g-force involved in bringing something to a dead stop from several hundred feet per second in a couple feet of travel as Paul points out quickly convinces one that at the very least things like accelerometer chips will be irreversibly damaged. Like cars and airplanes, by far the best way to survive a crash is to avoid a crash. It's just the laws of physics. Which, as has already been pointed out, does not mean that it's pointless to harden electronics against the effects of of a crash. It's just that trustworthiness afterward is a real issue. +McG+ > Furthermore, if the altimeter rotates even the slightest bit during flight > you loose your axial orientation and the accelerometer returns bogus > apogee > and altitude calculations. Also not that it is something I am proud of, > but having burned in three rockets (from above 5,000 feet each time one > from above 8,000) I tried aluminum housings on the last two and the > altimeter started surviving the crashes. Sort of. It survived enough to > get the data off of it and do a forensic examination, which is how the > high > Rds On was discovered. That said, one would be a ill advised to use it > again for flight. Who knows to what degree the surface mounted components > were loosened and the degree to which the baro unit and accelerometer chip > were torqued out of spec and using it again would be asking for > trouble. On the last burn in calculated peak Gs on impact were around > 8,500. Ooops. I would also point out that the critical part of the whole > exercise was having the walston transmitter in the same housing as the > altimeter. Without that transmitter there would be almost no way to find > the remains. I suppose breakable capsules containing skunk extract and a > good bloodhound would get you close but that's a little to novel for my > particular tastes. > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Tue Oct 13 01:58:47 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 01:58:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: <45717540910121751j68e28d33t218934124ecb2456@mail.gmail.com> References: <10661302.1255390876468.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <322693.20753.qm@web112904.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <45717540910121751j68e28d33t218934124ecb2456@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <589f7ed719e654972d3db49060dfee27.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> I'm not chickening out because of the weather. I'm chickening out for other reasons! Every year I do one post about how much I hate driving in snow. And another one about sleeping in the back of my pickup when it's 17 freakin' degrees. But it ain't time yet... Oh darn I just did. :) +McG+ > I will be there with the OROC GSE trailer in tow. What time do we want > the > trailer out there Friday? > Steve, I'm with you anybody who chickens out because of weather is a > weenie. > Robert, I have a 38/720 loaner motor from the Pres.. > Jeff Moore I have a DVD of Tsolo's images from Sheridan for you to add to > the website. > > I can smell the sage already. > > -Joe > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Robert Braibish > wrote: > >> Not sure how I got my replies crossed on those postings from Steve sorry >> for an confusion Andrew. >> >> Robert >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: "steve-c at ix.netcom.com" >> To: Gary Harris ; Greg Clark >> Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Sent: Mon, October 12, 2009 4:41:16 PM >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >> >> It won't rain on Saturday! How do I know? Because I just bought a >> commercial motor and I haven't done such in over (2) years - see y'all >> on >> the sage. Anyone staying home because of the weather is a weeny. >> /Steve >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >From: Gary Harris >> >Sent: Oct 12, 2009 2:42 PM >> >To: Greg Clark >> >Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >> > >> >and the prediction of when we will see partly sunny days and showery >> days >> >changes every day, twice sofar since Robert's original post. I'll be >> >hanging out Sat/Sun waiting for a window. >> > >> >most likely there will be some showers and also some clearings to fly >> in, >> >but it's hard to tell when. Once at Rocketober I flew a rocket in the >> late >> >afternoon, it was fairly clear and not cold, by the time I recovered it >> it >> >was about 35F and blowing snow sideways. >> > >> >Gary Harris >> > >> > >> >----- Original Message ----- >> >From: "Greg Clark" >> >To: "Gary Lech" >> >Cc: >> >Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:25 AM >> >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >> > >> > >> >We won't cancel the launch, but if the weather's bad, there might not >> >be too much going UP! >> > >> >On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: >> >> >> >> Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is >> bad. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> >> Gary >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Krausert, Robert >> >> To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >> >> >> Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am >> >> Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Sir, >> >> We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. >> >> >> >> Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The >> weather >> >> outlook >> >> has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday >> still >> >> has >> >> 40% chance of precip. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Robert >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: >> rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >> >> On >> >> Behalf Of Gary Lech >> >> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM >> >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather >> >> >> >> Hi folks, >> >> I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be >> cancelled >> >> at the >> >> last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling >> required >> >> to >> >> fly? >> >> >> >> Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd >> and >> >> enjoy >> >> the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to >> getting >> >> rid >> >> of me for a few days. >> >> >> >> Cheers from new guy ~ >> >> Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( >> >> >> http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 >> >> ) >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: Robert Krausert >> >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org >> >> Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM >> >> Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket >> >> LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 >> >> >> >> >> >> We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. >> >> >> >> Weather forecast is: >> >> Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers >> >> Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers >> >> Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds >> >> Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. >> >> >> >> Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank >> you >> >> sir. >> >> >> >> Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast >> out >> >> there >> >> for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive >> changes >> >> in >> >> rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Robert >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: Robert Krausert >> >> To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM >> >> Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc >> >> ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th >> >> 2009 >> >> >> >> >> >> OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - >> >> OREGONROCKETRY - >> >> ROCKETOBER - >> >> >> >> As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to >> announce >> >> our >> >> Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October >> 16th >> >> through >> >> 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will >> join >> us >> >> for a >> >> very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific >> Northwest. >> >> You >> >> are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. >> >> >> >> Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry >> begins >> >> with >> >> OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for >> >> OregonRocketry. >> >> We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are >> one. >> >> This >> >> launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining >> >> flights. >> >> >> >> October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are >> >> welcome >> >> to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance >> with >> >> TRA >> >> research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, >> are >> >> allowed >> >> to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under >> 18, >> >> and >> >> invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in >> the >> >> prep >> >> area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly >> rockets >> on >> >> Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA >> members. >> >> >> >> Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor >> days. >> >> Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You >> do >> not >> >> need >> >> to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and >> motors, >> and >> >> spend >> >> some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday >> and >> >> 8:00am >> >> to 2:00pm Sunday.. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need >> something >> >> on >> >> your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! >> >> >> >> Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in >> the >> >> dark. >> >> But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. >> Those >> >> glow >> >> sticks taped to rockets can work. The o >> >> nsite FSO will need to make sure >> >> everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before >> >> committing. They may have ideas. >> >> >> >> This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have >> some >> >> ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During >> the >> >> day >> >> and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or >> >> treat you >> >> to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep >> them >> >> at >> >> bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood >> to >> >> contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes >> after a >> >> long >> >> day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the >> center >> >> one, >> >> located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to >> share. >> >> Also, >> >> consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee >> like >> >> devices >> >> at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at >> the >> >> community >> >> fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, >> that's >> >> up to >> >> them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. >> >> >> >> The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA >> safety >> >> code. >> >> As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please >> visit >> >> the >> >> OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR >> and >> >> TRA >> >> websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to >> >> comprehend >> >> and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will >> be >> >> reviewed >> >> by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. >> If >> >> you are >> >> bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about >> >> stability, >> >> center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage >> and >> >> complex >> >> rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. >> >> >> >> Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the >> public. >> >> We >> >> certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot >> of >> >> fun. >> >> >> >> We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA >> clearance >> >> to >> >> 25,000 feet above sea level ( >> >> or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have >> >> a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA >> rules >> >> are 75% >> >> of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or >> >> 15,375 feet >> >> AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be >> high >> >> enough >> >> to keep everyone happy. >> >> >> >> Directions: >> >> We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the >> Brothers >> >> launch >> >> site. At this web URL, there are two directions. >> >> http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm >> >> >> >> We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not >> create >> any >> >> more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new >> ones. >> The >> >> firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll >> have >> a >> >> fire >> >> Friday and Saturday evening after dusk.. Join us for some rocket talk >> and >> >> good >> >> times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some >> >> firewood. >> >> We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We >> normally >> >> get to >> >> watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us >> have >> >> been >> >> out there till 3am and later. >> >> >> >> New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch >> site, >> >> and >> >> has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need >> to >> be >> >> prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, >> sunburns >> >> can >> >> happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And >> >> sun-screen, >> >> sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta >> potties >> >> available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web >> site >> to >> >> learn >> >> more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we >> expect >> >> to >> >> have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact >> to >> the >> >> site. >> >> http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm >> >> >> >> We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and >> running >> of >> >> the >> >> event. >> >> >> >> Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. >> Prepare >> you >> >> and >> >> your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold >> or >> >> hot, >> >> water is >> >> so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you >> >> bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group >> >> healthy.. >> >> >> >> Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required >> to >> >> have >> >> one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per >> day >> >> and >> >> that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. >> >> >> >> Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at >> 9:30am >> >> Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th >> through >> >> 18th. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Robert >> >> >> >> OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - >> >> OREGONROCKETRY - >> >> ROCKETOBER >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Rockets mailing list >> >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Rockets mailing list >> >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Rockets mailing list >> >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> >> >_______________________________________________ >> >Rockets mailing list >> >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> >_______________________________________________ >> >Rockets mailing list >> >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > > > -- > Joe > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Tue Oct 13 02:11:15 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 02:11:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronicsbay? In-Reply-To: References: <6bc920e40910121856h4a060733w5a2ad7e277e340d@mail.gmail.com> <7CD4BD1175E3411391FC9AE7183C0345@LaptopKrausert> <96BBE6772B7B48F0820A37D83C724017@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: Building electronics to withstand a Mike Fisher M is a whole lot easier than building electronics to survive a typical high power rocket lawn dart. Still pretty hard. +McG+ > Missing my point I hope to some day (years from now) be ready to use a > Mike > F. M motor. and am looking for ways to shield the electronics from the > force > his M punches with. Build and test the Idea's now and all along the way > till I am ready with a design. (many years down the road) > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 8:28 PM, Robert Krausert > wrote: > >> How did 1147 fps go to 3500 fps? Geez!!! I had enough time with >> commercial. Dropping in a Fisher M would be I hope the "FSO reject my >> flight >> please." I would love to some day. But next year will be a continuation >> of >> the K250 flights. Maybe when I have time to work with the local FG mill >> to >> fabricate by an all aluminum airframe and welded fins. Before I stick a >> Fisher motor up my rocket, I better have learned several flights in mach >> 1 >> and 2 first. Mach 2 is rare. I think I've only read a couple. Let's just >> say >> I might be asking Fisher's grandkids to whip me up a batch when I'm >> ready. >> >> And for the record... I've never lawndarted a rocket. I've had two >> crashed, >> no darts. Both were open, but maybe not in one piece. I just liked that >> email address. >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* Christopher Guenther >> *To:* Robert Krausert >> *Cc:* Dave Randall ; cpovercg at rocketmail.com ; >> rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com ; RocketsNW >> *Sent:* Monday, October 12, 2009 8:09 PM >> *Subject:* Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof >> electronicsbay? >> >> What about building not only for lawn darting but for say a launching >> force >> some what like a Mike F. 54mm M? >> >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Robert Krausert < >> lawndart.robert at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> My shred in July was flown with an Altacc2. Looked fine after recovery, >>> even though the ebay was a mess. Then I downloaded the data and at >>> first it >>> all seemed ok. Hit 1147 fps @ 4.7 seconds. Hit maximum altitude @ 5.1 >>> seconds of over 5000 feet. And a modest 26 g's at max. Everything >>> seemed >>> cool. Never an altimeter I'd use again for recovery, but maybe for >>> data. >>> >>> Then my mind started thinking. Crazy as it sounds. But then I started >>> doing the math. To have been at 5K feet after 5.1 seconds, the rocket >>> needed >>> to average 1000 fps. Off the pad, there is no way it was 1000 fps. This >>> was >>> on a K250. I could believe 4000 feet. >>> >>> The 5/8th Kevlar tape was torn in half. A lot of force to snap that. >>> But I >>> still have trouble believing the broken aft under thrust and forward >>> sections playing tug-of-war could have tossed the forward section a >>> 1000 >>> feet in 0.3 seconds. >>> >>> So, my best guess - the Altecc accuracy is off by ~20%. That's only a >>> guess. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Robert >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Randall" >>> To: >>> Cc: ; "RocketsNW" >>> >>> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 6:56 PM >>> >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof >>> electronicsbay? >>> >>> >>> Not saying I would reuse... But the data from the flight would be good >>> for forensics if it were not readily apparent what the failure >>> condition was. Depending on the condition though and assuming it >>> passes testing I might fly it as a backup. >>> >>> On Monday, October 12, 2009, wrote: >>> >>>> I think it comes back to do you want to trust avioics that have >>>> "survived" a crash? Down one rocket...want to make it two? >>>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Dave Randall >>>> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:00:56 >>>> To: >>>> Cc: >>>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Fwd: Wanna build a shock/crush proof >>>> electronics >>>> bay? >>>> >>>> A few fellow rocketeers and I have also discussed some type of shock >>>> absorbing material outside the e-bay. Notion being that by default, >>>> the electronics are rigid with the airframe, but some type of crush >>>> zones fore and aft of the e-bay would absorb much of the shock. Not >>>> to say that hi-g treatments are unnecessary, but would reduce the need >>>> for them, and potentially extend the margin of error. >>>> >>>> Crush zones could be coupled with some type of energy absorbing >>>> material as well. >>>> >>>> That said, there is huge difference between attempting to survive a >>>> high altitude ballistic impact, a drogue only recovery impact and the >>>> impacts in between. I could see a design that handles typical >>>> non-chute impacts, but shovel recovery, that's a whole 'nother >>>> engineering challenge. >>>> >>>> Dave >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> - Dave >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From absworld at cet.com Tue Oct 13 06:34:19 2009 From: absworld at cet.com (Bob & Ann Yanecek) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 06:34:19 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) In-Reply-To: <39824.10999.qm@web112913.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <25453518.1255395858817.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <39824.10999.qm@web112913.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <01c901ca4c09$df51ff30$9df5fd90$@com> I would guess the D cato was due to the motor being currently frozen, not from previous temperature cycling. I have stored my BP motors out in the shop for years now where temps annually get down below the teens. Only cato's have been from motors that did not get to warm up before ignition. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Braibish Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:15 PM To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com; Andrew Greenberg; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) Last rocketober was a good launch.? I was there with both my wife and son CAMPING! hard-core, tent & all.? The digital thermometer read 11 degrees Saturday night.? I knew right then that if my wife suck with me for the whole weekend that she really did love me!? Well, the 20 years of marriage is a pretty good indicator too.? My sons weekend was not so good his brand new Comanche III?cato'd on it's maiden voyage.? We figured the D motor had too many temperature highs and lows.? My wife took a pretty spectacular picture - it might look like it survived the blast but it pushed the two remaining motors up into the body tube and they burned things up and the whole thing fell to earth, bounced off a canopy onto a nearby pickup. I've seen some pretty tragic losses in the year or so I have been in the hobby, literally thousands of dollars lost in the fraction of a second, but this was the hardest... but disturbingly cool to see.? I'm just glad my son can laugh about it now...I posted some pics to rocketsnw, memories of Rocketober '08. Robert Braibish ________________________________ From: "steve-c at ix.netcom.com" To: Robert Braibish ; Andrew Greenberg ; rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Mon, October 12, 2009 6:04:18 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) Good for you!? The OROC October launches are always good - even last year in sub-freezing temps with snow on the sage it was fun.? I can't imagine this year will be any worse.? /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Robert Braibish >Sent: Oct 12, 2009 4:58 PM >To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com, Andrew Greenberg , rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) > > >Well! that clinches it for me.? If I had any doubts about going this weekend they are gone now... >If I couldn't be convinced with a reasonable well thought out?rational argument?(and who could argue with rationale like that), then goad me!? >Weeny, Ha!? I'll show you weeny... no wait... that didn't come out right... oh never mind see ya all there! > >Robert Braibish > > > > ________________________________ From: "steve-c at ix.netcom.com" >To: Andrew Greenberg ; rockets at rocketsnw.com >Sent: Mon, October 12, 2009 4:42:48 PM >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this weekend (!) > >Roy?? Rob?? Help this guy out and be a good "L3 buddy".? /Steve > >-----Original Message----- >>From: Andrew Greenberg >>Sent: Oct 12, 2009 4:38 PM >>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>Subject: [RocketsNW] Still looking for help from someone with an L3 this??? weekend (!) >> >>Hi everyone, >> >>We're still looking for an L3 person to help us launch this Sunday at >>Rocketober. We have a CTI N2500 reload that's got our name on it at >>Giant Leap, and a Aerotech 98 mm case, and a rocket all ready to go, but >>we don't have a L3 person to help us launch it this weekend. We hope to >>get some of our members L3 certified this spring/summer, but for now, >>we're really hoping someone will be able to help us out. >> >>If you have a L3, and will be at Rocketober this Sunday, could you drop >>me a line as soon as you can? >> >>Thanks! >> >>Andrew >> >>-- >>------------------------------------------------------- >>Andrew Greenberg >> >>Portland State Aerospace Society (http://psas.pdx.edu/) >>andrew at psas.pdx.edu? P: 503.788.1343? C: 503.708.7711 >>------------------------------------------------------- >>_______________________________________________ >>Rockets mailing list >>Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>? > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >? > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Tue Oct 13 08:32:18 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:32:18 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: <589f7ed719e654972d3db49060dfee27.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> References: <10661302.1255390876468.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <322693.20753.qm@web112904.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <45717540910121751j68e28d33t218934124ecb2456@mail.gmail.com> <589f7ed719e654972d3db49060dfee27.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Message-ID: I have noticed that the weather report is very different when you go from one weather reporting website to another. I have checked 3 sites and they all show Friday as being a good day but the all differ on both Saturday and Sunday. Everything from sunny and warm to showers and cold, one even has freezing rain. This is still not going to stop me from being there hoping for a clear spot to go 5000 feet. On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 1:58 AM, wrote: > I'm not chickening out because of the weather. I'm chickening out for > other reasons! > > Every year I do one post about how much I hate driving in snow. And > another one about sleeping in the back of my pickup when it's 17 freakin' > degrees. But it ain't time yet... > > Oh darn I just did. :) > +McG+ > > > > I will be there with the OROC GSE trailer in tow. What time do we want > > the > > trailer out there Friday? > > Steve, I'm with you anybody who chickens out because of weather is a > > weenie. > > Robert, I have a 38/720 loaner motor from the Pres.. > > Jeff Moore I have a DVD of Tsolo's images from Sheridan for you to add to > > the website. > > > > I can smell the sage already. > > > > -Joe > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Robert Braibish > > wrote: > > > >> Not sure how I got my replies crossed on those postings from Steve sorry > >> for an confusion Andrew. > >> > >> Robert > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ________________________________ > >> From: "steve-c at ix.netcom.com" > >> To: Gary Harris ; Greg Clark > > >> Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> Sent: Mon, October 12, 2009 4:41:16 PM > >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > >> > >> It won't rain on Saturday! How do I know? Because I just bought a > >> commercial motor and I haven't done such in over (2) years - see y'all > >> on > >> the sage. Anyone staying home because of the weather is a weeny. > >> /Steve > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> >From: Gary Harris > >> >Sent: Oct 12, 2009 2:42 PM > >> >To: Greg Clark > >> >Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > >> > > >> >and the prediction of when we will see partly sunny days and showery > >> days > >> >changes every day, twice sofar since Robert's original post. I'll be > >> >hanging out Sat/Sun waiting for a window. > >> > > >> >most likely there will be some showers and also some clearings to fly > >> in, > >> >but it's hard to tell when. Once at Rocketober I flew a rocket in the > >> late > >> >afternoon, it was fairly clear and not cold, by the time I recovered it > >> it > >> >was about 35F and blowing snow sideways. > >> > > >> >Gary Harris > >> > > >> > > >> >----- Original Message ----- > >> >From: "Greg Clark" > >> >To: "Gary Lech" > >> >Cc: > >> >Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:25 AM > >> >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > >> > > >> > > >> >We won't cancel the launch, but if the weather's bad, there might not > >> >be too much going UP! > >> > > >> >On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Gary Lech wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Ok then. GO no matter what, I like that! > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> I'd hate to be the only that shows up just because the weather is > >> bad. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Cheers, > >> >> > >> >> Gary > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- > >> >> From: Krausert, Robert > >> >> To: Gary Lech ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> >> > >> >> Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2009 9:59 am > >> >> Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Sir, > >> >> We are go!!! No plan for this event to be canceled. > >> >> > >> >> Maximum altitude in over cast skies is below the cloud deck. The > >> weather > >> >> outlook > >> >> has improved. Friday is mostly sunny, H69. Same on Sunday. Saturday > >> still > >> >> has > >> >> 40% chance of precip. > >> >> > >> >> Cheers, > >> >> Robert > >> >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- > >> >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: > >> rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > >> >> On > >> >> Behalf Of Gary Lech > >> >> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:51 AM > >> >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > >> >> > >> >> Hi folks, > >> >> I'm wondering if there's a possibility that the launch could be > >> cancelled > >> >> at the > >> >> last minute due to the weather. Is there a minimum cloud ceiling > >> required > >> >> to > >> >> fly? > >> >> > >> >> Of course if everyone goes no matter what I guess I'd join the crowd > >> and > >> >> enjoy > >> >> the camraderie. Furthermore, I think my wife is looking forward to > >> getting > >> >> rid > >> >> of me for a few days. > >> >> > >> >> Cheers from new guy ~ > >> >> Gary Lech - WA7GL, TRA, and amateur meteoroligist ( > >> >> > >> > http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KORMONRO2 > >> >> ) > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> From: Robert Krausert > >> >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com ; members at oregonrocketry.org > >> >> Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:36 PM > >> >> Subject: [RocketsNW] We Are Go!!!: OregonRocketry Rocketober Rocket > >> >> LaunchEvent October 16th - 18th 2009 > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> We are go for Rocketober. Details are provided below. > >> >> > >> >> Weather forecast is: > >> >> Friday 61H / 34L w/ Few Showers > >> >> Saturday 63H / 33L w/ Showers > >> >> Sunday 62H / 31L w/ Few Clouds > >> >> Hope the forecast improves as the week progresses. > >> >> > >> >> Randy, please notify the FAA and fighter wing early next week. Thank > >> you > >> >> sir. > >> >> > >> >> Have a great time everyone. Sorry I will miss the event. Make toast > >> out > >> >> there > >> >> for another great year of rocketry, this club and all the positive > >> changes > >> >> in > >> >> rules & regs. You are all great people, proud to know you. > >> >> > >> >> Cheers, > >> >> Robert > >> >> > >> >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> From: Robert Krausert > >> >> To: members at oregonrocketry.org ; rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> >> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 6:30 PM > >> >> Subject: OregonRocketry Rocketober Roc > >> >> ket Launch Event October 16th - 18th > >> >> 2009 > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > >> >> OREGONROCKETRY - > >> >> ROCKETOBER - > >> >> > >> >> As the current President of OregonRocketry, It is my pleasure to > >> announce > >> >> our > >> >> Rocketober rocket launch event in Brothers Oregon happening October > >> 16th > >> >> through > >> >> 18th. Speaking for the entire board of directors, we hope you will > >> join > >> us > >> >> for a > >> >> very exciting and memorable weekend of rocketry in the Pacific > >> Northwest. > >> >> You > >> >> are welcome and certainly encouraged to join us. > >> >> > >> >> Fun for all ages. Adventures in model, sport, and amatuer rocketry > >> begins > >> >> with > >> >> OregonRocketry. This is the final major launch event of 2009 for > >> >> OregonRocketry. > >> >> We can easily expect to see 100+ people at this launch. Hope you are > >> one. > >> >> This > >> >> launch typically brings for a great weekend and a lot of entertaining > >> >> flights. > >> >> > >> >> October 16th is Research Launch day. Tripoli members L2 or higher are > >> >> welcome > >> >> to fly hybrid and EX type rockets. Of course, all within accordance > >> with > >> >> TRA > >> >> research safety code. Tripoli members 18 years and older, any level, > >> are > >> >> allowed > >> >> to fly rockets using commercial motors. Non-TRA members, those under > >> 18, > >> >> and > >> >> invited guests are allowed to watch. However, you're not allowed in > >> the > >> >> prep > >> >> area or beyond the flight line. You must be a TRA member to fly > >> rockets > >> on > >> >> Friday. Sorry NAR members, but Research Friday is only for TRA > >> members. > >> >> > >> >> Saturday October 17th and Sunday October 18th are commercial motor > >> days. > >> >> Everyone is welcome to fly rockets on both Saturday and Sunday. You > >> do > >> not > >> >> need > >> >> to be member to fly Saturday or Sunday. Bring your rockets and > >> motors, > >> and > >> >> spend > >> >> some time with us having a great time flying. 8:00am to 10pm Saturday > >> and > >> >> 8:00am > >> >> to 2:00pm Sunday.. Night launch on Saturday night, you only need > >> something > >> >> on > >> >> your rocket that illuminates the rocket. Glow sticks work!!! > >> >> > >> >> Yes. Saturday evening will include a night launch. Rockets flying in > >> the > >> >> dark. > >> >> But if you want to fly, something needs to illuminate your rocket. > >> Those > >> >> glow > >> >> sticks taped to rockets can work. The o > >> >> nsite FSO will need to make sure > >> >> everything is safe. If you're not sure, show the FSO your idea before > >> >> committing. They may have ideas. > >> >> > >> >> This launch is very close to Halloween. As with previous years I have > >> some > >> >> ideas and recommendations to keep the fun and enjoyment alive. During > >> the > >> >> day > >> >> and evening, place a bowl of candy out for the kids. As they trick or > >> >> treat you > >> >> to inspect your rocket or rockets, you'll have a small treat to keep > >> them > >> >> at > >> >> bay. On Saturday night, there are a couple of things. Bring firewood > >> to > >> >> contribute to the community fire pit. A place where everone goes > >> after a > >> >> long > >> >> day of prepping, flying, and recovery. The community firepit is the > >> center > >> >> one, > >> >> located about 30 yards West of the LCO table. Bring firewood to > >> share. > >> >> Also, > >> >> consider bringing those glow-stick rings. They make great Frisbee > >> like > >> >> devices > >> >> at night for both kids and adults to enjoy. Remember your candy at > >> the > >> >> community > >> >> fire. If the youngsters want to test out their Halloween outfits, > >> that's > >> >> up to > >> >> them. The goal is having a great time both day time and evening. > >> >> > >> >> The club asks that you are aware and comprehend both NAR and TRA > >> safety > >> >> code. > >> >> As well as all rules required for the Brothers launch site. Please > >> visit > >> >> the > >> >> OregonRocketry.com web site and review our site rules, and visit NAR > >> and > >> >> TRA > >> >> websites and review their safety codes. I expect everyone there to > >> >> comprehend > >> >> and adhere to these codes. Safety is our priority. All flights will > >> be > >> >> reviewed > >> >> by a flight control officer. They have final approval of your flight. > >> If > >> >> you are > >> >> bringing a custom made rocket, be prepared to answer questions about > >> >> stability, > >> >> center of pressure, center of gravity, delay time, etc. Multi-stage > >> and > >> >> complex > >> >> rockets, be prepared to show simulation results if asked. > >> >> > >> >> Rocketober is a great launch event, and popular by members and the > >> public. > >> >> We > >> >> certainly hope you can join us, and who knows - you might have a lot > >> of > >> >> fun. > >> >> > >> >> We are at an altitude of 4500 feet. For commercial motors we FAA > >> clearance > >> >> to > >> >> 25,000 feet above sea level ( > >> >> or 20,500 feet above ground level or AGL). We have > >> >> a call in extension to 35,500 feet AGL. For research motors by TRA > >> rules > >> >> are 75% > >> >> of the waiver, which is clearance to 18,750 feet above sea level (or > >> >> 15,375 feet > >> >> AGL). With the call in extension to 26.625 feet AGL.That should be > >> high > >> >> enough > >> >> to keep everyone happy. > >> >> > >> >> Directions: > >> >> We offer complete directions on the OregonRocketry web to the > >> Brothers > >> >> launch > >> >> site. At this web URL, there are two directions. > >> >> http://www.oregonrocketry.com/dir/dir-bro.htm > >> >> > >> >> We currently have two ready firepits at the site. Please do not > >> create > >> any > >> >> more, we have agreement with landowners that we'd not create new > >> ones. > >> The > >> >> firepit just West of the LCO table is the community firepit. We'll > >> have > >> a > >> >> fire > >> >> Friday and Saturday evening after dusk.. Join us for some rocket talk > >> and > >> >> good > >> >> times meeting new friends or catching up with old friends. Bring some > >> >> firewood. > >> >> We all try to bring some, so we have enough for both nights. We > >> normally > >> >> get to > >> >> watch ISS (International Space Station) orbit, fun to see. Some of us > >> have > >> >> been > >> >> out there till 3am and later. > >> >> > >> >> New to OROC or Brothers? If so, welcome. Brothers is a great launch > >> site, > >> >> and > >> >> has a spectacular view of the Three Sisters mountain range. You need > >> to > >> be > >> >> prepared. Cold nights and hot days. Launch site is at 4,500 feet, > >> sunburns > >> >> can > >> >> happen quicker. Oh, and kind of important - water, water, water. And > >> >> sun-screen, > >> >> sun-screen, sun-screen. Camping is allowed and we'll have porta > >> potties > >> >> available. No on-site food vendors. Visit the Oregon Rocketry web > >> site > >> to > >> >> learn > >> >> more about the Brothers site, rules, and recommendations. While we > >> expect > >> >> to > >> >> have a great time, we are also very persistent about minimal impact > >> to > >> the > >> >> site. > >> >> http://www.oregonrocketry.com/pol/pol-oroc.htm > >> >> > >> >> We will look to OROC members to help with setup, tear down, and > >> running > >> of > >> >> the > >> >> event. > >> >> > >> >> Rocketober can be very cold at night. Last year they had snow. > >> Prepare > >> you > >> >> and > >> >> your family for everything, and plan to do layers with clothing. Cold > >> or > >> >> hot, > >> >> water is > >> >> so vital. Bring plenty of water for everyone in your group. Are you > >> >> bringing an animal? Water, water, water. Keep everyone in your group > >> >> healthy.. > >> >> > >> >> Stop by the registration table for a wristband. Everyone is required > >> to > >> >> have > >> >> one. If you are a non-member, launch fees are $10 per day or $15 per > >> day > >> >> and > >> >> that covers the entire family. Spectators are free. > >> >> > >> >> Lets have a great time. We will be holding an all flyers meeting at > >> 9:30am > >> >> Saturday morning. See you on the central Oregon sage, October 16th > >> through > >> >> 18th. > >> >> > >> >> Cheers, > >> >> Robert > >> >> > >> >> OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - OREGONROCKETRY - ROCKETOBER - > >> >> OREGONROCKETRY - > >> >> ROCKETOBER > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> Rockets mailing list > >> >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> Rockets mailing list > >> >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> Rockets mailing list > >> >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> >> > >> >> > >> >_______________________________________________ > >> >Rockets mailing list > >> >Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > > >> >_______________________________________________ > >> >Rockets mailing list > >> >Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Joe > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From carl20320 at msn.com Tue Oct 13 09:09:40 2009 From: carl20320 at msn.com (Carl Degner) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:09:40 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: References: <10661302.1255390876468.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <322693.20753.qm@web112904.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Chris, Remember, you are going to have a small child with you. I don't think you have ever been to Brothers. It is not even remotely like Sheridan. You are truly in the middle of nowhere. You can't just run down the road for food or a coat that you forgot to bring for your kid. It can be a pretty tough place to be... especially when the weather turns bad. If you are going to be doing your L2 flight, that is likely to be where all your attention is being spent. Brothers is not a place to be leaving a small child unattended to run around. Actually, no rocket launch is. Just a few thoughts I have decided I need to express after having been at Sheridan and now hearing the "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" posts. > Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:32:18 -0700 > From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com > To: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com > CC: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > I have noticed that the weather report is very different when you go from > one weather reporting website to another. I have checked 3 sites and they > all show Friday as being a good day but the all differ on both Saturday and > Sunday. Everything from sunny and warm to showers and cold, one even has > freezing rain. This is still not going to stop me from being there hoping > for a clear spot to go 5000 feet. From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Tue Oct 13 09:26:33 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:26:33 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather In-Reply-To: References: <10661302.1255390876468.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <322693.20753.qm@web112904.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I have been packing things into the van since Sunday. I will also have a propane tank with a heater attachment, a flash light, a propane lantern, a power converter, a space heater, a ton of bedding, and my wife is not working Friday to make sure I have everything this time. I am going to keep a much stronger hold on Marlon this time as well. One thing is I grew up in an area just like brothers. So I know how desolate it is and the weather differences. As a matter of fact I was talking to my dad and everything on the farm has had a nice frost coat every morning lately. So I will be very prepared for any weather. I may actually put a the kid harness on Marlon this time to I can keep him close. I am also bringing a TV, DVD player, and playstation for him. As for food I will have my cooler stuffed and some extra groceries as I will have plenty of fire wood and am bringing a propane barbaque. If I forget anything my wife will have me turned around to get it before I can even get out of Portland. I do thank you for reminding me to plan ahead and remember better this time. See you in the sage. On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Carl Degner wrote: > > Chris, > > Remember, you are going to have a small child with you. I don't think you > have ever been to Brothers. It is not even remotely like Sheridan. You are > truly in the middle of nowhere. You can't just run down the road for food > or a coat that you forgot to bring for your kid. It can be a pretty tough > place to be... especially when the weather turns bad. If you are going to > be doing your L2 flight, that is likely to be where all your attention is > being spent. Brothers is not a place to be leaving a small child unattended > to run around. Actually, no rocket launch is. > > > > Just a few thoughts I have decided I need to express after having been at > Sheridan and now hearing the "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" posts. > > > Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:32:18 -0700 > > From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com > > To: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com > > CC: rockets at rocketsnw.com > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober LaunchEvent weather > > > > I have noticed that the weather report is very different when you go from > > one weather reporting website to another. I have checked 3 sites and they > > all show Friday as being a good day but the all differ on both Saturday > and > > Sunday. Everything from sunny and warm to showers and cold, one even has > > freezing rain. This is still not going to stop me from being there hoping > > for a clear spot to go 5000 feet. > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From Mfreptiles at aol.com Tue Oct 13 09:45:29 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:45:29 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics Message-ID: Sometimes they don't get damaged, surprisingly enough, otherwise just dropping your altimeter off a table would ruin it, since the force from that would exceed most altimeters g rating. If in doubt, send back to the manufacturer to be checked out. Every time I've done that, the manufacturer tests it for free. Cheap insurance. Aside from one ARTS that got sent back as unsalvageable, only one altimeter needed recalibrated after a cato and subsequent dart. Even then, not a bad idea to send it along for a checkout ride with another alt doing deploy duties. Mike F. In a message dated 10/13/2009 1:45:06 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com writes: A quick calculation of the g-force involved in bringing something to a dead stop from several hundred feet per second in a couple feet of travel as Paul points out quickly convinces one that at the very least things like accelerometer chips will be irreversibly damaged. From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Tue Oct 13 13:47:18 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:47:18 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone ever mix a glow powder into their finishing epoxy? Message-ID: I have found a place where I can get some ultra bright glow colors in powders and paints. I was wondering if anyone has tried to mix the powder into their finishing coat of epoxy? Would this render the glow powder useless or have any major effects on the layers of already hardened epoxy below? From bigredbee at gmail.com Tue Oct 13 15:01:09 2009 From: bigredbee at gmail.com (Greg Clark) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:01:09 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] TRA Cert Flights at Brothers / October Message-ID: As you know, there has been a lot of speculation on the weather for this weekend's launch. For that and some other reasons, I can not commit to being at this weekend's launch, and will probably make my actual decision at the last minute. Sorry if this results in the cancellation of you'r planned certifications flights for Tripoli. Regards, Greg From dmrandall at gmail.com Tue Oct 13 15:28:27 2009 From: dmrandall at gmail.com (Dave Randall) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:28:27 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone ever mix a glow powder into their finishing epoxy? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6bc920e40910131528l1a696dd0q37d9229fef1f529c@mail.gmail.com> My guess is that it would work just fine to achieve a "glowing rocket". I've mixed the liquid coloring tint into the epoxy to dye it blue. It effectively thins the epoxy though. I suspect any wet paint would have the same effect. I would suggest a powder is better, but will tend to thicken the mixture. Thinning can be accomplished by any manufacturer's recommended thinning agent (may vary from mfr to mfr, but best I understand, acetone is the commonly used thinning agent). I doubt the glow powder would work any worse in the epoxy, unless you added some other agent that blocks the light. I've also epoxied on a layer over previous layers, with no ill effects, but the underlying layers should probably be scuffed for best adhesion. BTW, if you want to do this and are wondering about the final finish, I have a solution. I wrap my epoxied rockets (while wet) in 5 mil acetate. The acetate peels off easily after curing and leaves a gloss finish. Once fully cured, it's nice and shiny and very hard. I can offer more info and/or videos of the process if needed. Dave On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Christopher Guenther wrote: > I have found a place where I can get some ultra bright glow colors in > powders and paints. ?I was wondering if anyone has tried to mix the powder > into their finishing coat of epoxy? ?Would this render the glow powder > useless or have any major effects on the layers of already hardened epoxy > below? > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > -- - Dave From robert.krausert at intel.com Tue Oct 13 15:38:22 2009 From: robert.krausert at intel.com (Krausert, Robert) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:38:22 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone ever mix a glow powder into their finishing epoxy? In-Reply-To: <6bc920e40910131528l1a696dd0q37d9229fef1f529c@mail.gmail.com> References: <6bc920e40910131528l1a696dd0q37d9229fef1f529c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43AAA9DC@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Chris, That truly sounds like a cool idea. I reviewed [sniff] the website. Cool colors and appears to be bright. Unless [sniff] they light charged the objects before those pictures. The specs [sniff] look good too. I would [sniff] suggest avoid having a nasal cold at the time of mixing. [Haaa. Chew!!!] That is not a powder you'd want up your nose. Your nostrils would scare your family when you walk down a darkened hallway. "Look mom, dad is glowing." Actual Chris... Not the nose, but Halloween is coming. Could be fun. Cheers, Robert -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Dave Randall Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 3:28 PM To: Christopher Guenther Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Anyone ever mix a glow powder into their finishing epoxy? My guess is that it would work just fine to achieve a "glowing rocket". I've mixed the liquid coloring tint into the epoxy to dye it blue. It effectively thins the epoxy though. I suspect any wet paint would have the same effect. I would suggest a powder is better, but will tend to thicken the mixture. Thinning can be accomplished by any manufacturer's recommended thinning agent (may vary from mfr to mfr, but best I understand, acetone is the commonly used thinning agent). I doubt the glow powder would work any worse in the epoxy, unless you added some other agent that blocks the light. I've also epoxied on a layer over previous layers, with no ill effects, but the underlying layers should probably be scuffed for best adhesion. BTW, if you want to do this and are wondering about the final finish, I have a solution. I wrap my epoxied rockets (while wet) in 5 mil acetate. The acetate peels off easily after curing and leaves a gloss finish. Once fully cured, it's nice and shiny and very hard. I can offer more info and/or videos of the process if needed. Dave On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Christopher Guenther wrote: > I have found a place where I can get some ultra bright glow colors in > powders and paints. ?I was wondering if anyone has tried to mix the powder > into their finishing coat of epoxy? ?Would this render the glow powder > useless or have any major effects on the layers of already hardened epoxy > below? > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > -- - Dave _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Tue Oct 13 15:47:00 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 22:47:00 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics Message-ID: Building something that rigidly goes fomr 300+ MPH to 0 instantly without damage is pretty hard, indeed. But building something that could dissipate enough energy - instead of transferring it directly to a fragile electonics board - to survive that impact should be feasible. WOuld I trust the altimeter again without extensive testing? No. But I would love to be able to get the data off of it. And if it could be tested sufficiently to be useful, well, I am not made of cash and alts are pricey. Maybe not worth the effort, but I doubt impossible. -----Original Message----- From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 01:44 AM To: 'Paul Bogdanich' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics I've been restraining my keyboard-pecking finger until now. This is wherea basic physics course comes in handy. A quick calculation of the g-forceinvolved in bringing something to a dead stop from several hundred feetper second in a couple feet of travel as Paul points out quickly convincesone that at the very least things like accelerometer chips will beirreversibly damaged.Like cars and airplanes, by far the best way to survive a crash is toavoid a crash. It's just the laws of physics. Which, as has already beenpointed out, does not mean that it's pointless to harden electronicsagainst the effects of of a crash. It's just that trustworthinessafterward is a real issue.+McG+> Furthermore, if the altimeter rotates even the slightest bit during flight> you loose your axial orientation and the accelerometer returns bogus> apogee> and altitude calculations. Also not that it is something I am proud of,> but having burned in three rockets (from above 5,000 feet each time one> from above 8,000) I tried aluminum housings on the last two and the> altimeter started surviving the crashes. Sort of. It survived enough to> get the data off of it and do a forensic examination, which is how the> high> Rds On was discovered. That said, one would be a ill advised to use it> again for flight. Who knows to what degree the surface mounted components> were loosened and the degree to which the baro unit and accelerometer chip> were torqued out of spec and using it again would be asking for> trouble. On the last burn in calculated peak Gs on impact were around> 8,500. Ooops. I would also point out that the critical part of the whole> exercise was having the walston transmitter in the same housing as the> altimeter. Without that transmitter there would be almost no way to find> the remains. I suppose breakable capsules containing skunk extract and a> good bloodhound would get you close but that's a little to novel for my> particular tastes.>> _______________________________________________> Rockets mailing list> Rockets at rocketsnw.com> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Tue Oct 13 15:49:31 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 22:49:31 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone ever mix a glow powder into their finishing epoxy? Message-ID: TAP sells glow pigment for resin. I can't imagine it would have much effect on the "glowiness" and like any pigment it would depend on how much you put in as to whether it would negatiively affect the resin. Got a finish coat, can't see an issue though. -----Original Message----- From: Christopher Guenther [mailto:guentherchristopher at gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 01:47 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone ever mix a glow powder into their finishing epoxy? I have found a place where I can get some ultra bright glow colors inpowders and paints. I was wondering if anyone has tried to mix the powderinto their finishing coat of epoxy? Would this render the glow powderuseless or have any major effects on the layers of already hardened epoxybelow?_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Tue Oct 13 16:07:09 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:07:09 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone ever mix a glow powder into their finishing epoxy? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I was looking at the powders at http://glowinc.com/ and I fully intend on wearing my respirator mask when I do it. I plan to have a few layers of hardened finish coat before I apply it. That way even if I over mix I do not hurt the integrity of the airframe. If I under mix then I can always wait till its dry enough to add another layer again and again until I get the glow I want. On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Scott Berfield wrote: > TAP sells glow pigment for resin. > > I can't imagine it would have much effect on the "glowiness" and like any > pigment it would depend on how much you put in as to whether it would > negatiively affect the resin. Got a finish coat, can't see an issue though. > > > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* Christopher Guenther [mailto:guentherchristopher at gmail.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 13, 2009 01:47 PM > *To:* rockets at rocketsnw.com > *Subject:* [RocketsNW] Anyone ever mix a glow powder into their finishing > epoxy? > > I have found a place where I can get some ultra bright glow colors in > powders and paints. I was wondering if anyone has tried to mix the powder > into their finishing coat of epoxy? Would this render the glow powder > useless or have any major effects on the layers of already hardened epoxy > below? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From Mfreptiles at aol.com Tue Oct 13 16:16:53 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:16:53 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone ever mix a glow powder into their finishing epoxy? Message-ID: Mix it into some clearcoat and spray it on. Mike F. In a message dated 10/13/2009 4:08:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, guentherchristopher at gmail.com writes: I was looking at the powders at http://glowinc.com/ and I fully intend on wearing my respirator mask when I do it. I plan to have a few layers of hardened finish coat before I apply it. That way even if I over mix I do not hurt the integrity of the airframe. If I under mix then I can always wait till its dry enough to add another layer again and again until I get the glow I want. From IBELCHLOUD at aol.com Tue Oct 13 16:52:45 2009 From: IBELCHLOUD at aol.com (IBELCHLOUD at aol.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:52:45 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics Message-ID: I'd also like to remind everybody that not only is the ground attempting to convert your expensive electronics into confetti but there is usually a large, cylindrical aluminum object commonly known as a motor case that is barreling along at the same speed that is going to pulverize everything in front of it. So many of these crash proofing ideas would be great if you were only worried about what is in front of the bay. Just something else to think about, Lou From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Tue Oct 13 18:48:32 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 18:48:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <52f352ac62c08f0d627618c910035baf.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> It all depends on the exact details. A rocket lawn darting at 300fps and smoothly decelerating over three feet is a bit under 500 g's. Falling three feet off a workbench and coming to a stop in .05 inch is 720 g's. Other than the getting crushed between sections of the rocket aspect, falling off a workbench is generally the worse scenario: higher peak g's at oblique angles. Do any of the altimeter manufacturers give a maximum safe g force rating? Drop distance onto concrete? Plastic pop bottles are required to withstand a six foot drop onto a concrete floor without rupturing. Old Ma Bell telephones were, well, pretty much designed to be gorilla proof. If this wasn't such a small hobby it'd be foolish to sell rocket control electronics that didn't meet certain test requirements for ruggedness. But it's caveat emptor, and what actual tests and inspections are done on returned units? If it were my rocket I'd rest easier if I knew that vital electronics and *components* had never been subjected to stresses beyond OEM recommendations. IOW, I'm not sure I'd ever truly trust an altimeter that had been through worse than a very modest crash. But to each his own, and I haven't had the kind of experience with COTS hobby rocket electronics that many have. +McG+ > Sometimes they don't get damaged, surprisingly enough, otherwise just > dropping your altimeter off a table would ruin it, since the force from > that > would exceed most altimeters g rating. > > If in doubt, send back to the manufacturer to be checked out. Every time > I've done that, the manufacturer tests it for free. Cheap insurance. > Aside from one ARTS that got sent back as unsalvageable, only one > altimeter > needed recalibrated after a cato and subsequent dart. > > Even then, not a bad idea to send it along for a checkout ride with > another > alt doing deploy duties. > > Mike F. > > > In a message dated 10/13/2009 1:45:06 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com writes: > > A quick calculation of the g-force > involved in bringing something to a dead stop from several hundred feet > per second in a couple feet of travel as Paul points out quickly > convinces > one that at the very least things like accelerometer chips will be > irreversibly damaged. > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From appusher at q.com Tue Oct 13 19:05:16 2009 From: appusher at q.com (Bill Munds) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 02:05:16 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics In-Reply-To: <52f352ac62c08f0d627618c910035baf.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> References: Message-ID: Ken, What the G force rating for the assemblers throw the altimeters into a box from 2 feet? ;_} Bill EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD Join me > Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 18:48:32 -0700 > From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com > To: Mfreptiles at aol.com > CC: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > > It all depends on the exact details. A rocket lawn darting at 300fps and > smoothly decelerating over three feet is a bit under 500 g's. Falling > three feet off a workbench and coming to a stop in .05 inch is 720 g's. > Other than the getting crushed between sections of the rocket aspect, > falling off a workbench is generally the worse scenario: higher peak g's > at oblique angles. > > Do any of the altimeter manufacturers give a maximum safe g force rating? > Drop distance onto concrete? > > Plastic pop bottles are required to withstand a six foot drop onto a > concrete floor without rupturing. Old Ma Bell telephones were, well, > pretty much designed to be gorilla proof. If this wasn't such a small > hobby it'd be foolish to sell rocket control electronics that didn't meet > certain test requirements for ruggedness. But it's caveat emptor, and > what actual tests and inspections are done on returned units? > > If it were my rocket I'd rest easier if I knew that vital electronics and > *components* had never been subjected to stresses beyond OEM > recommendations. IOW, I'm not sure I'd ever truly trust an altimeter that > had been through worse than a very modest crash. > > But to each his own, and I haven't had the kind of experience with COTS > hobby rocket electronics that many have. > +McG+ > > > > Sometimes they don't get damaged, surprisingly enough, otherwise just > > dropping your altimeter off a table would ruin it, since the force from > > that > > would exceed most altimeters g rating. > > > > If in doubt, send back to the manufacturer to be checked out. Every time > > I've done that, the manufacturer tests it for free. Cheap insurance. > > Aside from one ARTS that got sent back as unsalvageable, only one > > altimeter > > needed recalibrated after a cato and subsequent dart. > > > > Even then, not a bad idea to send it along for a checkout ride with > > another > > alt doing deploy duties. > > > > Mike F. > > > > > > In a message dated 10/13/2009 1:45:06 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com writes: > > > > A quick calculation of the g-force > > involved in bringing something to a dead stop from several hundred feet > > per second in a couple feet of travel as Paul points out quickly > > convinces > > one that at the very least things like accelerometer chips will be > > irreversibly damaged. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Tue Oct 13 19:07:05 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:07:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I wholeheartedly agree that the #1 thing is to be able to get the data out of the memory after a crash. My guess is that the best design would be to solidly mount the (conformally coated) circuit board in a virtually indestructible case, then put impact absorbers fore and aft. Exactly what kind of impact absorbers? Probably something in concept like the "crushable aluminum" that NASA built into the LM legs. Which brings up memories of the "mushroom on demand" impact absorbing nosecone idea. So you essentially get to the point of following after auto designers and design the rocket to incur the damage to absorb the kinetic energy and protect the passenger, the electronics. And then you're in another whole level of rocket design and construction. Fun long-term project, but not cheaper than buying new altimeters. +McG+ > Building something that rigidly goes fomr 300+ MPH to 0 instantly without > damage is pretty hard, indeed. But building something that could dissipate > enough energy - instead of transferring it directly to a fragile > electonics board - to survive that impact should be feasible. WOuld I > trust the altimeter again without extensive testing? No. But I would love > to be able to get the data off of it. And if it could be tested > sufficiently to be useful, well, I am not made of cash and alts are > pricey. > > > Maybe not worth the effort, but I doubt impossible. > > -----Original Message----- > From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 01:44 AM > To: 'Paul Bogdanich' > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > > I've been restraining my keyboard-pecking finger until now. This is wherea > basic physics course comes in handy. A quick calculation of the > g-forceinvolved in bringing something to a dead stop from several hundred > feetper second in a couple feet of travel as Paul points out quickly > convincesone that at the very least things like accelerometer chips will > beirreversibly damaged.Like cars and airplanes, by far the best way to > survive a crash is toavoid a crash. It's just the laws of physics. Which, > as has already beenpointed out, does not mean that it's pointless to > harden electronicsagainst the effects of of a crash. It's just that > trustworthinessafterward is a real issue.+McG+> Furthermore, if the > altimeter rotates even the slightest bit during flight> you loose your > axial orientation and the accelerometer returns bogus> apogee> and > altitude calculations. Also not that it is something I am proud of,> but > having burned in three rockets (from above 5,000 feet each time one> from > above 8,000) I tried aluminum housings on the last two and the> altimeter > started surviving the crashes. Sort of. It survived enough to> get the > data off of it and do a forensic examination, which is how the> high> Rds > On was discovered. That said, one would be a ill advised to use it> again > for flight. Who knows to what degree the surface mounted components> were > loosened and the degree to which the baro unit and accelerometer chip> > were torqued out of spec and using it again would be asking for> trouble. > On the last burn in calculated peak Gs on impact were around> 8,500. > Ooops. I would also point out that the critical part of the whole> > exercise was having the walston transmitter in the same housing as the> > altimeter. Without that transmitter there would be almost no way to find> > the remains. I suppose breakable capsules containing skunk extract and a> > good bloodhound would get you close but that's a little to novel for my> > particular tastes.>> _______________________________________________> > Rockets mailing list> Rockets at rocketsnw.com> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>_______________________________________________Rockets > mailing > listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Tue Oct 13 19:24:23 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:24:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0e3f2c04c6af2dd7f00a8dc4d16c4ea2.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Good question. Speeds would be comparable. What makes the difference is how hard the stop is. I just guessed at .05 inch. If the thing stops in .01 inch, it'd be 3600 g's for a three foot fall. But if the accelerometer can bump into cardboard, transfer momentum to another circuit board, spin around in the box etc. then the momentum can be lost over a much longer time. I'd expect your scenario to stay well under 100 g's peak in any direction. And the more I think about it, accelerometer chips use a cantilever design made out of silicon. Silicon crystal is brittle, so it would probably be more a matter of works ok vs totally broken. That's what I get when I post in thinking-as-I-go mode! But one still has to be cautious of hidden cracks and other subtle flaws in circuit boards and components. +McG+ > > <52f352ac62c08f0d627618c910035baf.squirrel at www.wa-net.com> > MIME-Version: 1.0 > > --_d17f7e06-0352-41aa-8e51-1e9b7b5d5676_ > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > > Ken=2C What the G force rating for the assemblers throw the altimeters > int= > o a box from 2 feet? > > =3B_} > > =20 > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD > Join me > > > =20 >> Date: Tue=2C 13 Oct 2009 18:48:32 -0700 >> From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com >> To: Mfreptiles at aol.com >> CC: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics >>=20 >> It all depends on the exact details. A rocket lawn darting at 300fps and >> smoothly decelerating over three feet is a bit under 500 g's. Falling >> three feet off a workbench and coming to a stop in .05 inch is 720 >> g's.=20 >> Other than the getting crushed between sections of the rocket aspect=2C >> falling off a workbench is generally the worse scenario: higher peak g's >> at oblique angles. >>=20 >> Do any of the altimeter manufacturers give a maximum safe g force >> rating?= > =20 >> Drop distance onto concrete? >>=20 >> Plastic pop bottles are required to withstand a six foot drop onto a >> concrete floor without rupturing. Old Ma Bell telephones were=2C well=2C >> pretty much designed to be gorilla proof. If this wasn't such a small >> hobby it'd be foolish to sell rocket control electronics that didn't >> meet >> certain test requirements for ruggedness. But it's caveat emptor=2C and >> what actual tests and inspections are done on returned units? >>=20 >> If it were my rocket I'd rest easier if I knew that vital electronics >> and >> *components* had never been subjected to stresses beyond OEM >> recommendations. IOW=2C I'm not sure I'd ever truly trust an altimeter >> th= > at >> had been through worse than a very modest crash. >>=20 >> But to each his own=2C and I haven't had the kind of experience with >> COTS >> hobby rocket electronics that many have. >> +McG+ >>=20 >>=20 >> > Sometimes they don't get damaged=2C surprisingly enough=2C otherwise >> ju= > st >> > dropping your altimeter off a table would ruin it=2C since the force >> fr= > om >> > that >> > would exceed most altimeters g rating. >> > >> > If in doubt=2C send back to the manufacturer to be checked out. Every >> t= > ime >> > I've done that=2C the manufacturer tests it for free. Cheap insurance. >> > Aside from one ARTS that got sent back as unsalvageable=2C only one >> > altimeter >> > needed recalibrated after a cato and subsequent dart. >> > >> > Even then=2C not a bad idea to send it along for a checkout ride with >> > another >> > alt doing deploy duties. >> > >> > Mike F. >> > >> > >> > In a message dated 10/13/2009 1:45:06 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time=2C >> > kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com writes: >> > >> > A quick calculation of the g-force >> > involved in bringing something to a dead stop from several hundred >> feet >> > per second in a couple feet of travel as Paul points out quickly >> > convinces >> > one that at the very least things like accelerometer chips will be >> > irreversibly damaged. >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Rockets mailing list >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> > >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>=20 > = > > --_d17f7e06-0352-41aa-8e51-1e9b7b5d5676_ > Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > > > > > > Ken=2C =3B What the G force rating for the assemblers throw the > altimet= > ers into a =3B box from 2 feet?
> =3B_}
>  =3B
> Bill






> > FONT-FA= > MILY: 'Segoe UI'=2CTahoma=2Csan-serif"> > > >
= > href=3D"http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=3DEML_WLHM_GreaterGood= > "> BORDE= > R-LEFT-STYLE: none=3B BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none" alt=3D"i'm" > src=3D"http://= > gfx1.hotmail.com/mail/w4/pr01/ltr/i_charity.gif"> EMAILING FOR THE GREATER > = > GOOD
FONT-SI= > ZE: 8pt=3B PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px=3B COLOR: #3fb555=3B PADDING-TOP: 0px=3B > TEX= > T-DECORATION: underline">Join me

>
 =3B
>=3B Date: Tue=2C 13 Oct 2009 18:48:32 -0700
>=3B > Fr= > om: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com
>=3B To: > Mfreptiles at aol.com
>=3B= > CC: rockets at rocketsnw.com
>=3B Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build > a= > shock/crush proof electronics
>=3B
>=3B It all depends on the > e= > xact details. A rocket lawn darting at 300fps and
>=3B smoothly > decele= > rating over three feet is a bit under 500 g's. Falling
>=3B three > feet= > off a workbench and coming to a stop in .05 inch is 720 g's.
>=3B > Ot= > her than the getting crushed between sections of the rocket > aspect=2C
&g= > t=3B falling off a workbench is generally the worse scenario: higher peak > g= > 's
>=3B at oblique angles.
>=3B
>=3B Do any of the > altimete= > r manufacturers give a maximum safe g force rating?
>=3B Drop > distanc= > e onto concrete?
>=3B
>=3B Plastic pop bottles are required to > w= > ithstand a six foot drop onto a
>=3B concrete floor without > rupturing.= > Old Ma Bell telephones were=2C well=2C
>=3B pretty much designed to > b= > e gorilla proof. If this wasn't such a small
>=3B hobby it'd be > foolis= > h to sell rocket control electronics that didn't meet
>=3B certain > tes= > t requirements for ruggedness. But it's caveat emptor=2C and
>=3B > what= > actual tests and inspections are done on returned units?
>=3B >
>= > =3B If it were my rocket I'd rest easier if I knew that vital electronics > a= > nd
>=3B *components* had never been subjected to stresses beyond > OEM R>>=3B recommendations. IOW=2C I'm not sure I'd ever truly trust an > altim= > eter that
>=3B had been through worse than a very modest > crash.
>= > =3B
>=3B But to each his own=2C and I haven't had the kind of > experie= > nce with COTS
>=3B hobby rocket electronics that many have.
>=3B > = > +McG+
>=3B
>=3B
>=3B >=3B Sometimes they don't get > damag= > ed=2C surprisingly enough=2C otherwise just
>=3B >=3B dropping your > = > altimeter off a table would ruin it=2C since the force from
>=3B >= > =3B that
>=3B >=3B would exceed most altimeters g rating.
>=3B > = > >=3B
>=3B >=3B If in doubt=2C send back to the manufacturer to be > = > checked out. Every time
>=3B >=3B I've done that=2C the > manufacturer= > tests it for free. Cheap insurance.
>=3B >=3B Aside from one ARTS > t= > hat got sent back as unsalvageable=2C only one
>=3B >=3B > altimeter R>>=3B >=3B needed recalibrated after a cato and subsequent > dart.
&g= > t=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B Even then=2C not a bad idea to send it along > f= > or a checkout ride with
>=3B >=3B another
>=3B >=3B alt > doing= > deploy duties.
>=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B Mike F.
>=3B > >=3B<= > BR>>=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B In a message dated 10/13/2009 1:45:06 > A.M= > . Pacific Daylight Time=2C
>=3B >=3B kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com > wr= > ites:
>=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B A quick calculation of the > g-force<= > BR>>=3B >=3B involved in bringing something to a dead stop from > several= > hundred feet
>=3B >=3B per second in a couple feet of travel as > Pau= > l points out quickly
>=3B >=3B convinces
>=3B >=3B one that > a= > t the very least things like accelerometer chips will be
>=3B >=3B > i= > rreversibly damaged.
>=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B
>=3B >=3B > ___= > ____________________________________________
>=3B >=3B Rockets > maili= > ng list
>=3B >=3B Rockets at rocketsnw.com
>=3B >=3B > http://mx1.= > blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets
>=3B >=3B
>=3B > >=3B>>=3B
>=3B
>=3B >> _____________________________________________= > __
>=3B Rockets mailing list
>=3B > Rockets at rocketsnw.com
>=3B= > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets
>=3B
> = > > = > > --_d17f7e06-0352-41aa-8e51-1e9b7b5d5676_-- > From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Tue Oct 13 19:35:22 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:35:22 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics References: Message-ID: <4F36B727CE8646B4BCBBADCFB9214F00@LaptopKrausert> I've thought about this thread and a thought came to mind. If an altimeter was cased in superball rubber, that would mean the whole device, as I read it. I read that maybe bagging it so protect uncured rubber wouldn't damage components. But basically cased in a rubber form fitting. Ok, back to my point. If cased in the rubber, all objects have a mass rating. If G's are high enough to force compression of the PCB... does that mean all surface components would follow? If the PCB moves as little as a half millimeter, that might be enough to dislodge surface mount components from the PCB. Then things go bad. Just a thought. Shock absorbers on either end maybe. But cased in rubber might be a bad thing. The other was attaching mounting hardware and then casing in rubber. Isn't that just added weight? If the hardware couldn't hold, then I think the design needs rethinking. I applogize because I normally do not design for lawndarting. What I try to prevent. If I designed all my rockets to support my plans and also Fisher's G's flights... I'd build a concrete rocket that would never takes off. Mike's motor got me to 1/4 inch. Building for my next K250 is a far cry from a 200G flight. Why waste the weight. I could be wrong. Unless we all start building aluminum and CF rockets only. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Scott Berfield" Cc: ; "Paul Bogdanich" Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 7:07 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics >I wholeheartedly agree that the #1 thing is to be able to get the data out > of the memory after a crash. > > My guess is that the best design would be to solidly mount the > (conformally coated) circuit board in a virtually indestructible case, > then put impact absorbers fore and aft. Exactly what kind of impact > absorbers? Probably something in concept like the "crushable aluminum" > that NASA built into the LM legs. > > Which brings up memories of the "mushroom on demand" impact absorbing > nosecone idea. > > So you essentially get to the point of following after auto designers and > design the rocket to incur the damage to absorb the kinetic energy and > protect the passenger, the electronics. And then you're in another whole > level of rocket design and construction. Fun long-term project, but not > cheaper than buying new altimeters. > +McG+ > > >> Building something that rigidly goes fomr 300+ MPH to 0 instantly without >> damage is pretty hard, indeed. But building something that could >> dissipate >> enough energy - instead of transferring it directly to a fragile >> electonics board - to survive that impact should be feasible. WOuld I >> trust the altimeter again without extensive testing? No. But I would love >> to be able to get the data off of it. And if it could be tested >> sufficiently to be useful, well, I am not made of cash and alts are >> pricey. >> >> >> Maybe not worth the effort, but I doubt impossible. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 01:44 AM >> To: 'Paul Bogdanich' >> Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics >> >> I've been restraining my keyboard-pecking finger until now. This is >> wherea >> basic physics course comes in handy. A quick calculation of the >> g-forceinvolved in bringing something to a dead stop from several hundred >> feetper second in a couple feet of travel as Paul points out quickly >> convincesone that at the very least things like accelerometer chips will >> beirreversibly damaged.Like cars and airplanes, by far the best way to >> survive a crash is toavoid a crash. It's just the laws of physics. Which, >> as has already beenpointed out, does not mean that it's pointless to >> harden electronicsagainst the effects of of a crash. It's just that >> trustworthinessafterward is a real issue.+McG+> Furthermore, if the >> altimeter rotates even the slightest bit during flight> you loose your >> axial orientation and the accelerometer returns bogus> apogee> and >> altitude calculations. Also not that it is something I am proud of,> but >> having burned in three rockets (from above 5,000 feet each time one> from >> above 8,000) I tried aluminum housings on the last two and the> altimeter >> started surviving the crashes. Sort of. It survived enough to> get the >> data off of it and do a forensic examination, which is how the> high> Rds >> On was discovered. That said, one would be a ill advised to use it> again >> for flight. Who knows to what degree the surface mounted components> were >> loosened and the degree to which the baro unit and accelerometer chip> >> were torqued out of spec and using it again would be asking for> trouble. >> On the last burn in calculated peak Gs on impact were around> 8,500. >> Ooops. I would also point out that the critical part of the whole> >> exercise was having the walston transmitter in the same housing as the> >> altimeter. Without that transmitter there would be almost no way to find> >> the remains. I suppose breakable capsules containing skunk extract and a> >> good bloodhound would get you close but that's a little to novel for my> >> particular tastes.>> _______________________________________________> >> Rockets mailing list> Rockets at rocketsnw.com> >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>_______________________________________________Rockets >> mailing >> listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From jhadv at pacifier.com Tue Oct 13 19:48:53 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (jhadv at pacifier.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:48:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Crush zones and electronics. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <49313.209.253.79.135.1255488533.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> Look, an electronics bay is a component in a lager vehicle. The electornics package is not burning in the rocket is! Therefore, your crush zones need not be incorporated into the electronics bay proper unless said bay is mounted in the nose. If the electronics bay is in the middle of the vehicle then the forward portion of the vehicle is the crush zone in that direction and the space between the bay and the motor top is the zone for the aft part of the rocket. In this configuration the more rigid the electronics bay the better. This is one of the reasons why mid rocket electronics bays are by far the best design. The other is for dual deploy configurations it eliminates wiring. However, Mid body bays make the rocket longer than if the bay is in the nose. So, depending on what one wants to sacrifice to gain a few more percent in total altitude then the electronics are best positioned in the noes thus reducing the length of the vehicle which is the most important variable (assuming one does not have some outrageous fin design and assuming the rocket is built colse to optimum mass) for maximum altitude once the diameter of the vehicle is established. This is also why Mr. Fisher's challenge is so difficult. He specifies "minimum diameter." It does help to do the math. The form of the equatons (disregarding specific solution sets for specific applications) is irrefutible. Nose cone shape in terms of wetted area is the next most impostant variable. Then fins, then protrusions and joints (assuming they are modest to begin with) and then body surface characteristics. From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Tue Oct 13 20:00:23 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:00:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics In-Reply-To: <4F36B727CE8646B4BCBBADCFB9214F00@LaptopKrausert> References: <4F36B727CE8646B4BCBBADCFB9214F00@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: <82bbdd137aa16c6569e96d34517e1b64.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> When encasing electronics you always have to be sure the encasing material isn't conductive, even slightly. You also have to consider heat, which shouldn't be a problem with the low power circuits in altimeters. And you have to consider how forces are transmitted through the material to the various components. But mostly, you really don't want to use a bouncy material for accelerometers. ;-) Look, I'm no expert here. Just know a little bit of classical physics. IMO, look at what the real experts do and copy that. Board orientation, conformal coatings, component orientation, board mounting, no slack in wires blah blah blah... Play 'Ricky Rocket.' You're this tiny little guy inside the rocket. Look around. All of a sudden everything weighs 1000 times as much. What's going to happen? Oh, that big electrolytic capacitor mounted on the circuit board is sticking out sideways. It's only held on by the solder on the bottom of the board to the two tiny wires. It's gonna get ripped off...or the leads are gonna get ripped out of it... Kopeche? A lot of rocket design really is that simple! So, now, you're little tiny Ricky Rocket encased in nice bouncy superball material inside this rocket, see... Took your Dramamine? :) +McG+ > I've thought about this thread and a thought came to mind. > > If an altimeter was cased in superball rubber, that would mean the whole > device, as I read it. I read that maybe bagging it so protect uncured > rubber > wouldn't damage components. But basically cased in a rubber form fitting. > > Ok, back to my point. If cased in the rubber, all objects have a mass > rating. If G's are high enough to force compression of the PCB... does > that > mean all surface components would follow? If the PCB moves as little as a > half millimeter, that might be enough to dislodge surface mount components > from the PCB. Then things go bad. > > Just a thought. Shock absorbers on either end maybe. But cased in rubber > might be a bad thing. > > The other was attaching mounting hardware and then casing in rubber. Isn't > that just added weight? If the hardware couldn't hold, then I think the > design needs rethinking. > > I applogize because I normally do not design for lawndarting. What I try > to > prevent. If I designed all my rockets to support my plans and also > Fisher's > G's flights... I'd build a concrete rocket that would never takes off. > Mike's motor got me to 1/4 inch. Building for my next K250 is a far cry > from > a 200G flight. Why waste the weight. I could be wrong. Unless we all start > building aluminum and CF rockets only. > > Cheers, > Robert > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: "Scott Berfield" > Cc: ; "Paul Bogdanich" > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 7:07 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > > >>I wholeheartedly agree that the #1 thing is to be able to get the data >> out >> of the memory after a crash. >> >> My guess is that the best design would be to solidly mount the >> (conformally coated) circuit board in a virtually indestructible case, >> then put impact absorbers fore and aft. Exactly what kind of impact >> absorbers? Probably something in concept like the "crushable aluminum" >> that NASA built into the LM legs. >> >> Which brings up memories of the "mushroom on demand" impact absorbing >> nosecone idea. >> >> So you essentially get to the point of following after auto designers >> and >> design the rocket to incur the damage to absorb the kinetic energy and >> protect the passenger, the electronics. And then you're in another >> whole >> level of rocket design and construction. Fun long-term project, but not >> cheaper than buying new altimeters. >> +McG+ >> >> >>> Building something that rigidly goes fomr 300+ MPH to 0 instantly >>> without >>> damage is pretty hard, indeed. But building something that could >>> dissipate >>> enough energy - instead of transferring it directly to a fragile >>> electonics board - to survive that impact should be feasible. WOuld I >>> trust the altimeter again without extensive testing? No. But I would >>> love >>> to be able to get the data off of it. And if it could be tested >>> sufficiently to be useful, well, I am not made of cash and alts are >>> pricey. >>> >>> >>> Maybe not worth the effort, but I doubt impossible. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com >>> [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] >>> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 01:44 AM >>> To: 'Paul Bogdanich' >>> Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics >>> >>> I've been restraining my keyboard-pecking finger until now. This is >>> wherea >>> basic physics course comes in handy. A quick calculation of the >>> g-forceinvolved in bringing something to a dead stop from several >>> hundred >>> feetper second in a couple feet of travel as Paul points out quickly >>> convincesone that at the very least things like accelerometer chips >>> will >>> beirreversibly damaged.Like cars and airplanes, by far the best way to >>> survive a crash is toavoid a crash. It's just the laws of physics. >>> Which, >>> as has already beenpointed out, does not mean that it's pointless to >>> harden electronicsagainst the effects of of a crash. It's just that >>> trustworthinessafterward is a real issue.+McG+> Furthermore, if the >>> altimeter rotates even the slightest bit during flight> you loose your >>> axial orientation and the accelerometer returns bogus> apogee> and >>> altitude calculations. Also not that it is something I am proud of,> >>> but >>> having burned in three rockets (from above 5,000 feet each time one> >>> from >>> above 8,000) I tried aluminum housings on the last two and the> >>> altimeter >>> started surviving the crashes. Sort of. It survived enough to> get the >>> data off of it and do a forensic examination, which is how the> high> >>> Rds >>> On was discovered. That said, one would be a ill advised to use it> >>> again >>> for flight. Who knows to what degree the surface mounted components> >>> were >>> loosened and the degree to which the baro unit and accelerometer chip> >>> were torqued out of spec and using it again would be asking for> >>> trouble. >>> On the last burn in calculated peak Gs on impact were around> 8,500. >>> Ooops. I would also point out that the critical part of the whole> >>> exercise was having the walston transmitter in the same housing as the> >>> altimeter. Without that transmitter there would be almost no way to >>> find> >>> the remains. I suppose breakable capsules containing skunk extract and >>> a> >>> good bloodhound would get you close but that's a little to novel for >>> my> >>> particular tastes.>> _______________________________________________> >>> Rockets mailing list> Rockets at rocketsnw.com> >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>_______________________________________________Rockets >>> mailing >>> listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > From jhadv at pacifier.com Tue Oct 13 20:01:22 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (jhadv at pacifier.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:01:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Crush zones and electronics. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <49351.209.253.79.135.1255489282.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> Yes, yes I know. I forgot the tailcone in the list of the most important variables. But it's late. I have already started on my gin. From sb at berfield.com Tue Oct 13 20:21:55 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 03:21:55 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics Message-ID: I recently learned to appreciate crush zones when my 16 year old was rear ended at a stop light at 45 MPH. Car was totalled, but she was not injured. -----Original Message----- From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 07:07 PM To: 'Scott Berfield' Cc: 'Paul Bogdanich', rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics I wholeheartedly agree that the #1 thing is to be able to get the data out of the memory after a crash. My guess is that the best design would be to solidly mount the (conformally coated) circuit board in a virtually indestructible case, then put impact absorbers fore and aft. Exactly what kind of impact absorbers? Probably something in concept like the "crushable aluminum" that NASA built into the LM legs. Which brings up memories of the "mushroom on demand" impact absorbing nosecone idea. So you essentially get to the point of following after auto designers and design the rocket to incur the damage to absorb the kinetic energy and protect the passenger, the electronics. And then you're in another whole level of rocket design and construction. Fun long-term project, but not cheaper than buying new altimeters. +McG+ > Building something that rigidly goes fomr 300+ MPH to 0 instantly without > damage is pretty hard, indeed. But building something that could dissipate > enough energy - instead of transferring it directly to a fragile > electonics board - to survive that impact should be feasible. WOuld I > trust the altimeter again without extensive testing? No. But I would love > to be able to get the data off of it. And if it could be tested > sufficiently to be useful, well, I am not made of cash and alts are > pricey. > > > Maybe not worth the effort, but I doubt impossible. > > -----Original Message----- > From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 01:44 AM > To: 'Paul Bogdanich' > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > > I've been restraining my keyboard-pecking finger until now. This is wherea > basic physics course comes in handy. A quick calculation of the > g-forceinvolved in bringing something to a dead stop from several hundred > feetper second in a couple feet of travel as Paul points out quickly > convincesone that at the very least things like accelerometer chips will > beirreversibly damaged.Like cars and airplanes, by far the best way to > survive a crash is toavoid a crash. It's just the laws of physics. Which, > as has already beenpointed out, does not mean that it's pointless to > harden electronicsagainst the effects of of a crash. It's just that > trustworthinessafterward is a real issue.+McG+> Furthermore, if the > altimeter rotates even the slightest bit during flight> you loose your > axial orientation and the accelerometer returns bogus> apogee> and > altitude calculations. Also not that it is something I am proud of,> but > having burned in three rockets (from above 5,000 feet each time one> from > above 8,000) I tried aluminum housings on the last two and the> altimeter > started surviving the crashes. Sort of. It survived enough to> get the > data off of it and do a forensic examination, which is how the> high> Rds > On was discovered. That said, one would be a ill advised to use it> again > for flight. Who knows to what degree the surface mounted components> were > loosened and the degree to which the baro unit and accelerometer chip> > were torqued out of spec and using it again would be asking for> trouble. > On the last burn in calculated peak Gs on impact were around> 8,500. > Ooops. I would also point out that the critical part of the whole> > exercise was having the walston transmitter in the same housing as the> > altimeter. Without that transmitter there would be almost no way to find> > the remains. I suppose breakable capsules containing skunk extract and a> > good bloodhound would get you close but that's a little to novel for my> > particular tastes.>> _______________________________________________> > Rockets mailing list> Rockets at rocketsnw.com> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>_______________________________________________Rockets > mailing > listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From brodwcjj at integrity.com Tue Oct 13 20:28:02 2009 From: brodwcjj at integrity.com (brodwcjj at integrity.com) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 22:28:02 -0500 Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone ever mix a glow powder into their finishing epoxy? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Are you talking about their fluorescent pigments for day launches ? or the glow in the dark pigments for night launches ? I mixed enhanced glow in the dark pigment from United Nuclear: https://unitednuclear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=28_45&products_id=383 into a clear based paint for a night launch rocket. While it is a nice effect I would consider it a back up light source in case one's electrical light source would go out during launch/landing. I haven't seen anything better/long term brighter than electroluminescent tape or electroluminescent wires for night launches. Yes I did see a strobe light once that was brighter but the owner was anxious for a hurried launch as they only had a few minutes of battery life. Electroluminescent tape/wire will flash for hours then the phosphorescent pigment paint will glow for hours as a dimmer backup to the electrical lights. In a message dated 10/13/2009 4:08:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, guentherchristopher at gmail.com writes: I was looking at the powders at http://glowinc.com/ and I fully intend on wearing my respirator mask when I do it. I plan to have a few layers of hardened finish coat before I apply it. That way even if I over mix I do not hurt the integrity of the airframe. If I under mix then I can always wait till its dry enough to add another layer again and again until I get the glow I want. From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Tue Oct 13 20:28:58 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:28:58 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics References: Message-ID: Scott, Glad to hear no one hurt/uninjured. That's what matters. Reality step back. My goal, and I think you've read my messages, safety. Scott, sorry for the total. But glad it was only the vehicle. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Berfield" To: ; "Scott Berfield" Cc: ; "Paul Bogdanich" Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 8:21 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics >I recently learned to appreciate crush zones when my 16 year old was rear >ended at a stop light at 45 MPH. Car was totalled, but she was not injured. > -----Original Message----- > From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 07:07 PM > To: 'Scott Berfield' > Cc: 'Paul Bogdanich', rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > > I wholeheartedly agree that the #1 thing is to be able to get the data out > of the memory after a crash. My guess is that the best design would be to > solidly mount the (conformally coated) circuit board in a virtually > indestructible case, then put impact absorbers fore and aft. Exactly what > kind of impact absorbers? Probably something in concept like the > "crushable aluminum" that NASA built into the LM legs. Which brings up > memories of the "mushroom on demand" impact absorbing nosecone idea. So > you essentially get to the point of following after auto designers and > design the rocket to incur the damage to absorb the kinetic energy and > protect the passenger, the electronics. And then you're in another whole > level of rocket design and construction. Fun long-term project, but not > cheaper than buying new altimeters. +McG+ > Building something that > rigidly goes fomr 300+ MPH to 0 instantly without > damage is pretty hard, > indeed. But building something that could dissipate > enough > energy - instead of transferring it directly to a fragile > electonics > board - to survive that impact should be feasible. WOuld I > trust the > altimeter again without extensive testing? No. But I would love > to be > able to get the data off of it. And if it could be tested > sufficiently > to be useful, well, I am not made of cash and alts are > pricey. > > > > Maybe not worth the effort, but I doubt impossible. > > -----Original > Message----- > From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com > [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 > 01:44 AM > To: 'Paul Bogdanich' > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: > [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > > I've been > restraining my keyboard-pecking finger until now. This is wherea > basic > physics course comes in handy. A quick calculation of the > > g-forceinvolved in bringing something to a dead stop from several hundred > > feetper second in a couple feet of travel as Paul points out quickly > > convincesone t > hat at the very least things like accelerometer chips will > beirreve > rsibly damaged.Like cars and airplanes, by far the best way to > survive a > crash is toavoid a crash. It's just the laws of physics. Which, > as has > already beenpointed out, does not mean that it's pointless to > harden > electronicsagainst the effects of of a crash. It's just that > > trustworthinessafterward is a real issue.+McG+> Furthermore, if the > > altimeter rotates even the slightest bit during flight> you loose your > > axial orientation and the accelerometer returns bogus> apogee> and > > altitude calculations. Also not that it is something I am proud of,> but > > having burned in three rockets (from above 5,000 feet each time one> from > > above 8,000) I tried aluminum housings on the last two and the> > altimeter > started surviving the crashes. Sort of. It survived enough to> > get the > data off of it and do a forensic examination, which is how the> > high> Rds > On was discovered. That said, one would be a ill advised to > use it> again > for flight. Who knows to what degree the sur > face mounted components> were > loosened and the degree to which the baro > unit and accelerometer chip> > were torqued out of spec and using it again > would be asking for> trouble. > On the last burn in calculated peak Gs on > impact were around> 8,500. > Ooops. I would also point out that the > critical part of the whole> > exercise was having the walston transmitter > in the same housing as the> > altimeter. Without that transmitter there > would be almost no way to find> > the remains. I suppose breakable > capsules containing skunk extract and a> > good bloodhound would get you > close but that's a little to novel for my> > particular tastes.>> > _______________________________________________> > Rockets mailing list> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com> > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>_______________________________________________Rockets > > mailing > > listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From andrewm at hawkfeather.com Tue Oct 13 21:51:28 2009 From: andrewm at hawkfeather.com (Andrew MacMillen) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 21:51:28 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone ever mix a glow powder into their finishing epoxy? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4AD558D0.7090901@hawkfeather.com> I've had one of the 12V schlok electronics strobes I mentioned a while back run for 6+ hours on a 9V battery. And that also had 2 4 foot EL wires on the same battery. Andrew. brodwcjj at integrity.com wrote: > Are you talking about their fluorescent pigments for day launches ? or > the glow in the dark pigments for night launches ? > > I mixed enhanced glow in the dark pigment from United Nuclear: > https://unitednuclear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=28_45&products_id=383 > into a clear based paint for a night launch rocket. > While it is a nice effect I would consider it a back up light source in > case one's electrical light source would go out during launch/landing. > I haven't seen anything better/long term brighter than electroluminescent > tape or electroluminescent wires for night launches. Yes I did see a > strobe light once that was brighter but the owner was anxious for a > hurried launch as they only had a few minutes of battery life. > Electroluminescent tape/wire will flash for hours then the > phosphorescent pigment paint will glow for hours as a dimmer backup to the > electrical lights. > > > > In a message dated 10/13/2009 4:08:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > guentherchristopher at gmail.com > writes: > > I was looking at the powders at http://glowinc.com/ and I fully intend on > wearing my respirator mask when I do it. I plan to have a few layers of > hardened finish coat before I apply it. That way even if I over mix I do > not hurt the integrity of the airframe. If I under mix then I can always > wait till its dry enough to add another layer again and again until I get > the glow I want. > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Wed Oct 14 00:17:59 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:17:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I've only had two significant vehicular accidents in 40 years of having a driver's license. Both times I was rear-ended. Tell your daughter welcome to the club of folks who know from personal experience that some jerks just don't look where they're going. It's a big club. Fred A. hurries to get through intersections because, IIRC, he's been hit in an intersection. Me, I "drive the mirror" a lot but it still isn't always enough. With rockets though it's a matter of whether it's worth the effort to build in special crush zones to protect the altimeter. Really all depends on the flyer, the rocket design, a bunch of factors. We've heard all sides in this thread. +McG+ > I recently learned to appreciate crush zones when my 16 year old was rear > ended at a stop light at 45 MPH. Car was totalled, but she was not > injured. > -----Original Message----- > From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 07:07 PM > To: 'Scott Berfield' > Cc: 'Paul Bogdanich', rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > > I wholeheartedly agree that the #1 thing is to be able to get the data out > of the memory after a crash. My guess is that the best design would be to > solidly mount the (conformally coated) circuit board in a virtually > indestructible case, then put impact absorbers fore and aft. Exactly what > kind of impact absorbers? Probably something in concept like the > "crushable aluminum" that NASA built into the LM legs. Which brings up > memories of the "mushroom on demand" impact absorbing nosecone idea. So > you essentially get to the point of following after auto designers and > design the rocket to incur the damage to absorb the kinetic energy and > protect the passenger, the electronics. And then you're in another whole > level of rocket design and construction. Fun long-term project, but not > cheaper than buying new altimeters. +McG+ > Building something that > rigidly goes fomr 300+ MPH to 0 instantly without > damage is pretty hard, > indeed. But building something that could dissipate > enough energy - > instead of transferring it directly to a fragile > electonics board - to > survive that impact should be feasible. WOuld I > trust the altimeter > again without extensive testing? No. But I would love > to be able to get > the data off of it. And if it could be tested > sufficiently to be useful, > well, I am not made of cash and alts are > pricey. > > > Maybe not worth > the effort, but I doubt impossible. > > -----Original Message----- > From: > kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] > Sent: > Tuesday, October 13, 2009 01:44 AM > To: 'Paul Bogdanich' > Cc: > rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush > proof electronics > > I've been restraining my keyboard-pecking finger > until now. This is wherea > basic physics course comes in handy. A quick > calculation of the > g-forceinvolved in bringing something to a dead stop > from several hundred > feetper second in a couple feet of travel as Paul > points out quickly > convincesone that at the very least things like > accelerometer chips will > beirreversibly damaged.Like cars and airplanes, > by far the best way to > survive a crash is toavoid a crash. It's just the > laws of physics. Which, > as has already beenpointed out, does not mean > that it's pointless to > harden electronicsagainst the effects of of a > crash. It's just that > trustworthinessafterward is a real issue.+McG+> > Furthermore, if the > altimeter rotates even the slightest bit during > flight> you loose your > axial orientation and the accelerometer returns > bogus> apogee> and > altitude calculations. Also not that it is something > I am proud of,> but > having burned in three rockets (from above 5,000 > feet each time one> from > above 8,000) I tried aluminum housings on the > last two and the> altimeter > started surviving the crashes. Sort of. It > survived enough to> get the > data off of it and do a forensic > examination, which is how the> high> Rds > On was discovered. That said, > one would be a ill advised to use it> again > for flight. Who knows to > what degree the surface mounted components> were > loosened and the degree > to which the baro unit and accelerometer chip> > were torqued out of spec > and using it again would be asking for> trouble. > On the last burn in > calculated peak Gs on impact were around> 8,500. > Ooops. I would also > point out that the critical part of the whole> > exercise was having the > walston transmitter in the same housing as the> > altimeter. Without that > transmitter there would be almost no way to find> > the remains. I suppose > breakable capsules containing skunk extract and a> > good bloodhound would > get you close but that's a little to novel for my> > particular tastes.>> > _______________________________________________> > Rockets mailing list> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com> > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>_______________________________________________Rockets > > mailing > > listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > From fred at azinger.com Wed Oct 14 00:24:42 2009 From: fred at azinger.com (Fred Azinger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:24:42 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00fc01ca4c9f$66243380$326c9a80$@com> Instead of a crush-proof altimeter, how about spending effort to avoid the crushing.... Much safer that way ;-) -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 12:18 AM To: Scott Berfield Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com; Paul Bogdanich Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics I've only had two significant vehicular accidents in 40 years of having a driver's license. Both times I was rear-ended. Tell your daughter welcome to the club of folks who know from personal experience that some jerks just don't look where they're going. It's a big club. Fred A. hurries to get through intersections because, IIRC, he's been hit in an intersection. Me, I "drive the mirror" a lot but it still isn't always enough. With rockets though it's a matter of whether it's worth the effort to build in special crush zones to protect the altimeter. Really all depends on the flyer, the rocket design, a bunch of factors. We've heard all sides in this thread. +McG+ > I recently learned to appreciate crush zones when my 16 year old was rear > ended at a stop light at 45 MPH. Car was totalled, but she was not > injured. > -----Original Message----- > From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 07:07 PM > To: 'Scott Berfield' > Cc: 'Paul Bogdanich', rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > > I wholeheartedly agree that the #1 thing is to be able to get the data out > of the memory after a crash. My guess is that the best design would be to > solidly mount the (conformally coated) circuit board in a virtually > indestructible case, then put impact absorbers fore and aft. Exactly what > kind of impact absorbers? Probably something in concept like the > "crushable aluminum" that NASA built into the LM legs. Which brings up > memories of the "mushroom on demand" impact absorbing nosecone idea. So > you essentially get to the point of following after auto designers and > design the rocket to incur the damage to absorb the kinetic energy and > protect the passenger, the electronics. And then you're in another whole > level of rocket design and construction. Fun long-term project, but not > cheaper than buying new altimeters. +McG+ > Building something that > rigidly goes fomr 300+ MPH to 0 instantly without > damage is pretty hard, > indeed. But building something that could dissipate > enough energy - > instead of transferring it directly to a fragile > electonics board - to > survive that impact should be feasible. WOuld I > trust the altimeter > again without extensive testing? No. But I would love > to be able to get > the data off of it. And if it could be tested > sufficiently to be useful, > well, I am not made of cash and alts are > pricey. > > > Maybe not worth > the effort, but I doubt impossible. > > -----Original Message----- > From: > kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] > Sent: > Tuesday, October 13, 2009 01:44 AM > To: 'Paul Bogdanich' > Cc: > rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush > proof electronics > > I've been restraining my keyboard-pecking finger > until now. This is wherea > basic physics course comes in handy. A quick > calculation of the > g-forceinvolved in bringing something to a dead stop > from several hundred > feetper second in a couple feet of travel as Paul > points out quickly > convincesone that at the very least things like > accelerometer chips will > beirreversibly damaged.Like cars and airplanes, > by far the best way to > survive a crash is toavoid a crash. It's just the > laws of physics. Which, > as has already beenpointed out, does not mean > that it's pointless to > harden electronicsagainst the effects of of a > crash. It's just that > trustworthinessafterward is a real issue.+McG+> > Furthermore, if the > altimeter rotates even the slightest bit during > flight> you loose your > axial orientation and the accelerometer returns > bogus> apogee> and > altitude calculations. Also not that it is something > I am proud of,> but > having burned in three rockets (from above 5,000 > feet each time one> from > above 8,000) I tried aluminum housings on the > last two and the> altimeter > started surviving the crashes. Sort of. It > survived enough to> get the > data off of it and do a forensic > examination, which is how the> high> Rds > On was discovered. That said, > one would be a ill advised to use it> again > for flight. Who knows to > what degree the surface mounted components> were > loosened and the degree > to which the baro unit and accelerometer chip> > were torqued out of spec > and using it again would be asking for> trouble. > On the last burn in > calculated peak Gs on impact were around> 8,500. > Ooops. I would also > point out that the critical part of the whole> > exercise was having the > walston transmitter in the same housing as the> > altimeter. Without that > transmitter there would be almost no way to find> > the remains. I suppose > breakable capsules containing skunk extract and a> > good bloodhound would > get you close but that's a little to novel for my> > particular tastes.>> > _______________________________________________> > Rockets mailing list> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com> > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>_________________________ ______________________Rockets > > mailing > > listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Wed Oct 14 00:58:14 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:58:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics In-Reply-To: <00fc01ca4c9f$66243380$326c9a80$@com> References: <00fc01ca4c9f$66243380$326c9a80$@com> Message-ID: <8be7e4dd369e7081b19eb15929885da4.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> > Instead of a crush-proof altimeter, how about spending effort to avoid the > crushing.... > Much safer that way ;-) If you remember way back, that was my first point! But we've been discussing the practicality of ensuring data recovery by building in *some* extra protection for the electronics. Me, I'd only do what most of the good builders do in the way of electronics bays. It was Chris Guenther who wanted the crash-proof electronics. ;-) +McG+ > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com > Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 12:18 AM > To: Scott Berfield > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com; Paul Bogdanich > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > > I've only had two significant vehicular accidents in 40 years of having a > driver's license. Both times I was rear-ended. Tell your daughter > welcome to the club of folks who know from personal experience that some > jerks just don't look where they're going. It's a big club. Fred A. > hurries to get through intersections because, IIRC, he's been hit in an > intersection. Me, I "drive the mirror" a lot but it still isn't always > enough. > > With rockets though it's a matter of whether it's worth the effort to > build in special crush zones to protect the altimeter. Really all depends > on the flyer, the rocket design, a bunch of factors. We've heard all > sides in this thread. > +McG+ > > >> I recently learned to appreciate crush zones when my 16 year old was >> rear >> ended at a stop light at 45 MPH. Car was totalled, but she was not >> injured. >> -----Original Message----- >> From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 07:07 PM >> To: 'Scott Berfield' >> Cc: 'Paul Bogdanich', rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics >> >> I wholeheartedly agree that the #1 thing is to be able to get the data >> out >> of the memory after a crash. My guess is that the best design would be >> to >> solidly mount the (conformally coated) circuit board in a virtually >> indestructible case, then put impact absorbers fore and aft. Exactly >> what >> kind of impact absorbers? Probably something in concept like the >> "crushable aluminum" that NASA built into the LM legs. Which brings up >> memories of the "mushroom on demand" impact absorbing nosecone idea. So >> you essentially get to the point of following after auto designers and >> design the rocket to incur the damage to absorb the kinetic energy and >> protect the passenger, the electronics. And then you're in another whole >> level of rocket design and construction. Fun long-term project, but not >> cheaper than buying new altimeters. +McG+ > Building something that >> rigidly goes fomr 300+ MPH to 0 instantly without > damage is pretty >> hard, >> indeed. But building something that could dissipate > enough energy - >> instead of transferring it directly to a fragile > electonics board - to >> survive that impact should be feasible. WOuld I > trust the altimeter >> again without extensive testing? No. But I would love > to be able to >> get >> the data off of it. And if it could be tested > sufficiently to be >> useful, >> well, I am not made of cash and alts are > pricey. > > > Maybe not worth >> the effort, but I doubt impossible. > > -----Original Message----- > >> From: >> kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] > >> Sent: >> Tuesday, October 13, 2009 01:44 AM > To: 'Paul Bogdanich' > Cc: >> rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a >> shock/crush >> proof electronics > > I've been restraining my keyboard-pecking finger >> until now. This is wherea > basic physics course comes in handy. A quick >> calculation of the > g-forceinvolved in bringing something to a dead >> stop >> from several hundred > feetper second in a couple feet of travel as Paul >> points out quickly > convincesone that at the very least things like >> accelerometer chips will > beirreversibly damaged.Like cars and >> airplanes, >> by far the best way to > survive a crash is toavoid a crash. It's just >> the >> laws of physics. Which, > as has already beenpointed out, does not mean >> that it's pointless to > harden electronicsagainst the effects of of a >> crash. It's just that > trustworthinessafterward is a real issue.+McG+> >> Furthermore, if the > altimeter rotates even the slightest bit during >> flight> you loose your > axial orientation and the accelerometer returns >> bogus> apogee> and > altitude calculations. Also not that it is >> something >> I am proud of,> but > having burned in three rockets (from above 5,000 >> feet each time one> from > above 8,000) I tried aluminum housings on the >> last two and the> altimeter > started surviving the crashes. Sort of. It >> survived enough to> get the > data off of it and do a forensic >> examination, which is how the> high> Rds > On was discovered. That said, >> one would be a ill advised to use it> again > for flight. Who knows to >> what degree the surface mounted components> were > loosened and the >> degree >> to which the baro unit and accelerometer chip> > were torqued out of >> spec >> and using it again would be asking for> trouble. > On the last burn in >> calculated peak Gs on impact were around> 8,500. > Ooops. I would also >> point out that the critical part of the whole> > exercise was having the >> walston transmitter in the same housing as the> > altimeter. Without >> that >> transmitter there would be almost no way to find> > the remains. I >> suppose >> breakable capsules containing skunk extract and a> > good bloodhound >> would >> get you close but that's a little to novel for my> > particular >> tastes.>> >> _______________________________________________> > Rockets mailing list> >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com> > >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>_________________________ > ______________________Rockets >> > mailing > >> listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Wed Oct 14 09:35:58 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 09:35:58 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] 2 seats and tons of cargo room for Rocketober. Message-ID: I still have 2 seats and room for gear. I live on the west side of Portland. If you need or would like to hitch a ride to Brothers let me know. From rcdm at outlawnet.com Wed Oct 14 10:02:07 2009 From: rcdm at outlawnet.com (Moorehead) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:02:07 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics References: Message-ID: <40AE2A4E9F604F09BCD66894BEA58A3B@DANE> Back in the day I one successfully potted an e-bay with flubber. When the day came that it lawndarted I never did recover it........just kept bouncing higher, and higher. Just as well since any data would have been useless, the bounce altitude and accelaration were much higher than the original flight. I'm pretty sure it finally made the jump to "ludicrous speed". That's the way I remember it anyway. The older I get the better my "memories" get. Rod M. From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Wed Oct 14 11:30:14 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:30:14 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics In-Reply-To: <8be7e4dd369e7081b19eb15929885da4.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> References: <00fc01ca4c9f$66243380$326c9a80$@com> <8be7e4dd369e7081b19eb15929885da4.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Message-ID: My point Made! If you build it right you should never have to worry about crash proofing. But it is always good to have a backup plan don't you think. All the ideas that have been put through here are great and most of them have been proven in some for or other. Besides who cares who started the thread if there is anyone out there that might have needed the help or ideas it was worth it in my opinion. Also I wanted to test the masses on a wild idea and see what you all that before I made an attempt to develop it. Having said that I can honestly say that all the ideas in this thread Have helped me out a bit and if anything has help others as well. The best working ideas have to start somewhere! On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:58 AM, wrote: > > Instead of a crush-proof altimeter, how about spending effort to avoid > the > > crushing.... > > Much safer that way ;-) > > If you remember way back, that was my first point! > > But we've been discussing the practicality of ensuring data recovery by > building in *some* extra protection for the electronics. Me, I'd only do > what most of the good builders do in the way of electronics bays. > > It was Chris Guenther who wanted the crash-proof electronics. ;-) > +McG+ > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: > rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > > On Behalf Of kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com > > Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 12:18 AM > > To: Scott Berfield > > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com; Paul Bogdanich > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > > > > I've only had two significant vehicular accidents in 40 years of having a > > driver's license. Both times I was rear-ended. Tell your daughter > > welcome to the club of folks who know from personal experience that some > > jerks just don't look where they're going. It's a big club. Fred A. > > hurries to get through intersections because, IIRC, he's been hit in an > > intersection. Me, I "drive the mirror" a lot but it still isn't always > > enough. > > > > With rockets though it's a matter of whether it's worth the effort to > > build in special crush zones to protect the altimeter. Really all > depends > > on the flyer, the rocket design, a bunch of factors. We've heard all > > sides in this thread. > > +McG+ > > > > > >> I recently learned to appreciate crush zones when my 16 year old was > >> rear > >> ended at a stop light at 45 MPH. Car was totalled, but she was not > >> injured. > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com > ] > >> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 07:07 PM > >> To: 'Scott Berfield' > >> Cc: 'Paul Bogdanich', rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > >> > >> I wholeheartedly agree that the #1 thing is to be able to get the data > >> out > >> of the memory after a crash. My guess is that the best design would be > >> to > >> solidly mount the (conformally coated) circuit board in a virtually > >> indestructible case, then put impact absorbers fore and aft. Exactly > >> what > >> kind of impact absorbers? Probably something in concept like the > >> "crushable aluminum" that NASA built into the LM legs. Which brings up > >> memories of the "mushroom on demand" impact absorbing nosecone idea. So > >> you essentially get to the point of following after auto designers and > >> design the rocket to incur the damage to absorb the kinetic energy and > >> protect the passenger, the electronics. And then you're in another whole > >> level of rocket design and construction. Fun long-term project, but not > >> cheaper than buying new altimeters. +McG+ > Building something that > >> rigidly goes fomr 300+ MPH to 0 instantly without > damage is pretty > >> hard, > >> indeed. But building something that could dissipate > enough energy - > >> instead of transferring it directly to a fragile > electonics board - to > >> survive that impact should be feasible. WOuld I > trust the altimeter > >> again without extensive testing? No. But I would love > to be able to > >> get > >> the data off of it. And if it could be tested > sufficiently to be > >> useful, > >> well, I am not made of cash and alts are > pricey. > > > Maybe not worth > >> the effort, but I doubt impossible. > > -----Original Message----- > > >> From: > >> kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] > > >> Sent: > >> Tuesday, October 13, 2009 01:44 AM > To: 'Paul Bogdanich' > Cc: > >> rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a > >> shock/crush > >> proof electronics > > I've been restraining my keyboard-pecking finger > >> until now. This is wherea > basic physics course comes in handy. A quick > >> calculation of the > g-forceinvolved in bringing something to a dead > >> stop > >> from several hundred > feetper second in a couple feet of travel as Paul > >> points out quickly > convincesone that at the very least things like > >> accelerometer chips will > beirreversibly damaged.Like cars and > >> airplanes, > >> by far the best way to > survive a crash is toavoid a crash. It's just > >> the > >> laws of physics. Which, > as has already beenpointed out, does not mean > >> that it's pointless to > harden electronicsagainst the effects of of a > >> crash. It's just that > trustworthinessafterward is a real issue.+McG+> > >> Furthermore, if the > altimeter rotates even the slightest bit during > >> flight> you loose your > axial orientation and the accelerometer returns > >> bogus> apogee> and > altitude calculations. Also not that it is > >> something > >> I am proud of,> but > having burned in three rockets (from above 5,000 > >> feet each time one> from > above 8,000) I tried aluminum housings on the > >> last two and the> altimeter > started surviving the crashes. Sort of. It > >> survived enough to> get the > data off of it and do a forensic > >> examination, which is how the> high> Rds > On was discovered. That said, > >> one would be a ill advised to use it> again > for flight. Who knows to > >> what degree the surface mounted components> were > loosened and the > >> degree > >> to which the baro unit and accelerometer chip> > were torqued out of > >> spec > >> and using it again would be asking for> trouble. > On the last burn in > >> calculated peak Gs on impact were around> 8,500. > Ooops. I would also > >> point out that the critical part of the whole> > exercise was having the > >> walston transmitter in the same housing as the> > altimeter. Without > >> that > >> transmitter there would be almost no way to find> > the remains. I > >> suppose > >> breakable capsules containing skunk extract and a> > good bloodhound > >> would > >> get you close but that's a little to novel for my> > particular > >> tastes.>> > >> _______________________________________________> > Rockets mailing list> > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com> > > >> > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >>_________________________ > > ______________________Rockets > >> > mailing > > >> listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp:// > mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Wed Oct 14 11:48:27 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:48:27 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics In-Reply-To: <40AE2A4E9F604F09BCD66894BEA58A3B@DANE> References: <40AE2A4E9F604F09BCD66894BEA58A3B@DANE> Message-ID: Another Idea would be to build your ebay in a 3 inch coupler then put a lube around the coupler and lube the inside of a 4 inch coupler. Put the 3 inch coupler inside the 4 inch and cast the super ball material in between the 3 and 4 inch couplers. After it has set then you have a rubber sleeve and you can drill your vent hole through it. You can also do the same to make bulkheads. The you have a protective outer shell for anything 4 inch or bigger. Hows that Idea? On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Moorehead wrote: > Back in the day I one successfully potted an e-bay with flubber. When the > day came that it lawndarted I never did recover it........just kept bouncing > higher, and higher. Just as well since any data would have been useless, the > bounce altitude and accelaration were much higher than the original flight. > I'm pretty sure it finally made the jump to "ludicrous speed". > > That's the way I remember it anyway. The older I get the better my > "memories" get. > > Rod M. > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From sb at berfield.com Wed Oct 14 13:05:52 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:05:52 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics Message-ID: <200910142005.n9EK5uaj029918@omr14.networksolutionsemail.com> Not really and either/or situation. They work pretty hard to keep planes from crashing, but they also build pretty sturdy flight recorders :) -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 12:24 AM To: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com; 'Scott Berfield' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com; 'Paul Bogdanich' Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics Instead of a crush-proof altimeter, how about spending effort to avoid the crushing.... Much safer that way ;-) -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 12:18 AM To: Scott Berfield Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com; Paul Bogdanich Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics I've only had two significant vehicular accidents in 40 years of having a driver's license. Both times I was rear-ended. Tell your daughter welcome to the club of folks who know from personal experience that some jerks just don't look where they're going. It's a big club. Fred A. hurries to get through intersections because, IIRC, he's been hit in an intersection. Me, I "drive the mirror" a lot but it still isn't always enough. With rockets though it's a matter of whether it's worth the effort to build in special crush zones to protect the altimeter. Really all depends on the flyer, the rocket design, a bunch of factors. We've heard all sides in this thread. +McG+ > I recently learned to appreciate crush zones when my 16 year old was rear > ended at a stop light at 45 MPH. Car was totalled, but she was not > injured. > -----Original Message----- > From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 07:07 PM > To: 'Scott Berfield' > Cc: 'Paul Bogdanich', rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > > I wholeheartedly agree that the #1 thing is to be able to get the data out > of the memory after a crash. My guess is that the best design would be to > solidly mount the (conformally coated) circuit board in a virtually > indestructible case, then put impact absorbers fore and aft. Exactly what > kind of impact absorbers? Probably something in concept like the > "crushable aluminum" that NASA built into the LM legs. Which brings up > memories of the "mushroom on demand" impact absorbing nosecone idea. So > you essentially get to the point of following after auto designers and > design the rocket to incur the damage to absorb the kinetic energy and > protect the passenger, the electronics. And then you're in another whole > level of rocket design and construction. Fun long-term project, but not > cheaper than buying new altimeters. +McG+ > Building something that > rigidly goes fomr 300+ MPH to 0 instantly without > damage is pretty hard, > indeed. But building something that could dissipate > enough energy - > instead of transferring it directly to a fragile > electonics board - to > survive that impact should be feasible. WOuld I > trust the altimeter > again without extensive testing? No. But I would love > to be able to get > the data off of it. And if it could be tested > sufficiently to be useful, > well, I am not made of cash and alts are > pricey. > > > Maybe not worth > the effort, but I doubt impossible. > > -----Original Message----- > From: > kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] > Sent: > Tuesday, October 13, 2009 01:44 AM > To: 'Paul Bogdanich' > Cc: > rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush > proof electronics > > I've been restraining my keyboard-pecking finger > until now. This is wherea > basic physics course comes in handy. A quick > calculation of the > g-forceinvolved in bringing something to a dead stop > from several hundred > feetper second in a couple feet of travel as Paul > points out quickly > convincesone that at the very least things like > accelerometer chips will > beirreversibly damaged.Like cars and airplanes, > by far the best way to > survive a crash is toavoid a crash. It's just the > laws of physics. Which, > as has already beenpointed out, does not mean > that it's pointless to > harden electronicsagainst the effects of of a > crash. It's just that > trustworthinessafterward is a real issue.+McG+> > Furthermore, if the > altimeter rotates even the slightest bit during > flight> you loose your > axial orientation and the accelerometer returns > bogus> apogee> and > altitude calculations. Also not that it is something > I am proud of,> but > having burned in three rockets (from above 5,000 > feet each time one> from > above 8,000) I tried aluminum housings on the > last two and the> altimeter > started surviving the crashes. Sort of. It > survived enough to> get the > data off of it and do a forensic > examination, which is how the> high> Rds > On was discovered. That said, > one would be a ill advised to use it> again > for flight. Who knows to > what degree the surface mounted components> were > loosened and the degree > to which the baro unit and accelerometer chip> > were torqued out of spec > and using it again would be asking for> trouble. > On the last burn in > calculated peak Gs on impact were around> 8,500. > Ooops. I would also > point out that the critical part of the whole> > exercise was having the > walston transmitter in the same housing as the> > altimeter. Without that > transmitter there would be almost no way to find> > the remains. I suppose > breakable capsules containing skunk extract and a> > good bloodhound would > get you close but that's a little to novel for my> > particular tastes.>> > _______________________________________________> > Rockets mailing list> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com> > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>_________________________ ______________________Rockets > > mailing > > listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From fred.azinger at intel.com Wed Oct 14 15:25:36 2009 From: fred.azinger at intel.com (Azinger, Fred) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:25:36 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics In-Reply-To: <200910142005.n9EK5uaj029918@omr14.networksolutionsemail.com> References: <200910142005.n9EK5uaj029918@omr14.networksolutionsemail.com> Message-ID: They are in "limited" volume production of a man-rated vehicle -- they want all the feedback they can get, especially from bad situations. Plus they have the budget to boot. -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 1:06 PM To: Fred Azinger; kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com; 'Paul Bogdanich' Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics Not really and either/or situation. They work pretty hard to keep planes from crashing, but they also build pretty sturdy flight recorders :) -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 12:24 AM To: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com; 'Scott Berfield' Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com; 'Paul Bogdanich' Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics Instead of a crush-proof altimeter, how about spending effort to avoid the crushing.... Much safer that way ;-) -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 12:18 AM To: Scott Berfield Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com; Paul Bogdanich Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics I've only had two significant vehicular accidents in 40 years of having a driver's license. Both times I was rear-ended. Tell your daughter welcome to the club of folks who know from personal experience that some jerks just don't look where they're going. It's a big club. Fred A. hurries to get through intersections because, IIRC, he's been hit in an intersection. Me, I "drive the mirror" a lot but it still isn't always enough. With rockets though it's a matter of whether it's worth the effort to build in special crush zones to protect the altimeter. Really all depends on the flyer, the rocket design, a bunch of factors. We've heard all sides in this thread. +McG+ > I recently learned to appreciate crush zones when my 16 year old was rear > ended at a stop light at 45 MPH. Car was totalled, but she was not > injured. > -----Original Message----- > From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 07:07 PM > To: 'Scott Berfield' > Cc: 'Paul Bogdanich', rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush proof electronics > > I wholeheartedly agree that the #1 thing is to be able to get the data out > of the memory after a crash. My guess is that the best design would be to > solidly mount the (conformally coated) circuit board in a virtually > indestructible case, then put impact absorbers fore and aft. Exactly what > kind of impact absorbers? Probably something in concept like the > "crushable aluminum" that NASA built into the LM legs. Which brings up > memories of the "mushroom on demand" impact absorbing nosecone idea. So > you essentially get to the point of following after auto designers and > design the rocket to incur the damage to absorb the kinetic energy and > protect the passenger, the electronics. And then you're in another whole > level of rocket design and construction. Fun long-term project, but not > cheaper than buying new altimeters. +McG+ > Building something that > rigidly goes fomr 300+ MPH to 0 instantly without > damage is pretty hard, > indeed. But building something that could dissipate > enough energy - > instead of transferring it directly to a fragile > electonics board - to > survive that impact should be feasible. WOuld I > trust the altimeter > again without extensive testing? No. But I would love > to be able to get > the data off of it. And if it could be tested > sufficiently to be useful, > well, I am not made of cash and alts are > pricey. > > > Maybe not worth > the effort, but I doubt impossible. > > -----Original Message----- > From: > kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] > Sent: > Tuesday, October 13, 2009 01:44 AM > To: 'Paul Bogdanich' > Cc: > rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Wanna build a shock/crush > proof electronics > > I've been restraining my keyboard-pecking finger > until now. This is wherea > basic physics course comes in handy. A quick > calculation of the > g-forceinvolved in bringing something to a dead stop > from several hundred > feetper second in a couple feet of travel as Paul > points out quickly > convincesone that at the very least things like > accelerometer chips will > beirreversibly damaged.Like cars and airplanes, > by far the best way to > survive a crash is toavoid a crash. It's just the > laws of physics. Which, > as has already beenpointed out, does not mean > that it's pointless to > harden electronicsagainst the effects of of a > crash. It's just that > trustworthinessafterward is a real issue.+McG+> > Furthermore, if the > altimeter rotates even the slightest bit during > flight> you loose your > axial orientation and the accelerometer returns > bogus> apogee> and > altitude calculations. Also not that it is something > I am proud of,> but > having burned in three rockets (from above 5,000 > feet each time one> from > above 8,000) I tried aluminum housings on the > last two and the> altimeter > started surviving the crashes. Sort of. It > survived enough to> get the > data off of it and do a forensic > examination, which is how the> high> Rds > On was discovered. That said, > one would be a ill advised to use it> again > for flight. Who knows to > what degree the surface mounted components> were > loosened and the degree > to which the baro unit and accelerometer chip> > were torqued out of spec > and using it again would be asking for> trouble. > On the last burn in > calculated peak Gs on impact were around> 8,500. > Ooops. I would also > point out that the critical part of the whole> > exercise was having the > walston transmitter in the same housing as the> > altimeter. Without that > transmitter there would be almost no way to find> > the remains. I suppose > breakable capsules containing skunk extract and a> > good bloodhound would > get you close but that's a little to novel for my> > particular tastes.>> > _______________________________________________> > Rockets mailing list> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com> > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>_________________________ ______________________Rockets > > mailing > > listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From joebevier at gmail.com Wed Oct 14 17:19:58 2009 From: joebevier at gmail.com (Joe Bevier) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:19:58 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] ISS viewing for OROC Brothers Message-ID: <45717540910141719i62006dc1p2d598a2feba3bae3@mail.gmail.com> For those going to the Brothers launch this weekend this is the International Space Station fly over windows for the Bend area. The last 4 columns are minutes of viewing time, degrees above horizon, location where it rises, location where it sets. ISSFri Oct 16/06:36 AM 53012 above W 12 above NEISSSat Oct 17/05:28 AM 13131 above NE16 above NE ISSSat Oct 17/07:01 AM2 2011 above WNW20 above NNW ISSSun Oct 18/05:51 AM2 3030 above NNW12 above NE -- Joe From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Thu Oct 15 10:06:23 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:06:23 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? Message-ID: I understand there is most likely no cell reception it the Brothers launch site. I also understand that many of our fellow rocketeers are HAM radio operators. Is there set frequency for the Brothers launch site? The reason I ask is that my wife is worried that she will not be able to contact me if there is an emergency here at home. My dad being a HAM with a 70' tower and a directional in South Eastern Washington could put a call out on that Frequency for me to go home asap in the event of an emergency. My dads call sign is WB7TLK. From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Thu Oct 15 10:15:09 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (steve-c at ix.netcom.com) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:15:09 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? Message-ID: <2074999.1255626909384.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Cell phones work fine at Brothers - well, most do. Ham is for breakfast and supplements eggs just dandy. /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Christopher Guenther >Sent: Oct 15, 2009 10:06 AM >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? > >I understand there is most likely no cell reception it the Brothers launch >site. I also understand that many of our fellow rocketeers are HAM radio >operators. Is there set frequency for the Brothers launch site? The >reason I ask is that my wife is worried that she will not be able to contact >me if there is an emergency here at home. My dad being a HAM with a 70' >tower and a directional in South Eastern Washington could put a call out on >that Frequency for me to go home asap in the event of an emergency. My dads >call sign is WB7TLK. >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From tnetcenter at gmail.com Thu Oct 15 10:37:18 2009 From: tnetcenter at gmail.com (Jeff Moore) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:37:18 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? References: Message-ID: <2B613B71893E4DD1AC359BA4655AC8DB@TNTCENTER> Cell reception at the Brothers launch site is totally dependant upon your service provider (I don't know the specifics). Some people have great reception, others have none. I have a Tracfone and get great service there. Someone at the launch site will have phone service. AFAIK, there isn't a set ham freq. used by the club out there. You are line of site from the Pine Mtn repeater (11 miles) but that won't get you into Portland and unless someone is packing HF gear (unlikely) getting a transmission from SE Wash. is unlikely as well. You might be able to hit the Hoodoo 440 repeater which is tied into the Oregon Connect network, which would get you into Portland. If you have a 2m beam you can hit the Mt Hood repeater which will also get you into Portland. Jeff Moore KE7ACY BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Guenther" Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? I understand there is most likely no cell reception it the Brothers launch site. I also understand that many of our fellow rocketeers are HAM radio operators. Is there set frequency for the Brothers launch site? The reason I ask is that my wife is worried that she will not be able to contact me if there is an emergency here at home. My dad being a HAM with a 70' tower and a directional in South Eastern Washington could put a call out on that Frequency for me to go home asap in the event of an emergency. My dads call sign is WB7TLK. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From rcdm at outlawnet.com Thu Oct 15 10:53:09 2009 From: rcdm at outlawnet.com (Moorehead) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:53:09 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? References: <2B613B71893E4DD1AC359BA4655AC8DB@TNTCENTER> Message-ID: I know Verizon works fine at Brothers site. Rod M. From greg at bigredbee.com Thu Oct 15 10:54:21 2009 From: greg at bigredbee.com (Greg Clark) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:54:21 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? In-Reply-To: References: <2B613B71893E4DD1AC359BA4655AC8DB@TNTCENTER> Message-ID: so does AT&T On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Moorehead wrote: > I know Verizon works fine at Brothers site. > > Rod M. > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From joebevier at gmail.com Thu Oct 15 10:55:59 2009 From: joebevier at gmail.com (Joe Bevier) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:55:59 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? In-Reply-To: <2074999.1255626909384.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <2074999.1255626909384.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <45717540910151055i46606d30qd19a4284b7a23c28@mail.gmail.com> I've ever had a problem getting good cell reception there. I do like green eggs and ham, I do like them Sam I am. Slight preference for breakfast sausage though. Is there a amateur sausage radio band? On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 10:15 AM, wrote: > Cell phones work fine at Brothers - well, most do. Ham is for breakfast > and supplements eggs just dandy. /Steve > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Christopher Guenther > >Sent: Oct 15, 2009 10:06 AM > >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > >Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? > > > >I understand there is most likely no cell reception it the Brothers launch > >site. I also understand that many of our fellow rocketeers are HAM radio > >operators. Is there set frequency for the Brothers launch site? The > >reason I ask is that my wife is worried that she will not be able to > contact > >me if there is an emergency here at home. My dad being a HAM with a 70' > >tower and a directional in South Eastern Washington could put a call out > on > >that Frequency for me to go home asap in the event of an emergency. My > dads > >call sign is WB7TLK. > >_______________________________________________ > >Rockets mailing list > >Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > -- Joe From cpovercg at rocketmail.com Thu Oct 15 12:31:20 2009 From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com (Robert Braibish) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:31:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? In-Reply-To: <45717540910151055i46606d30qd19a4284b7a23c28@mail.gmail.com> References: <2074999.1255626909384.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <45717540910151055i46606d30qd19a4284b7a23c28@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <502484.91615.qm@web112909.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> ....Is there a amateur sausage radio band? ? No. But I used to?play keyboards in the world famous "Sausage Radio Band" (SRB). Not to drop names but we toured with the?Dead.?Yeah, -?and?opened for Steve Miller at?Candlestick in August '66.? We were strictly "professional".?I'm sure we'd still be playin if our lead singer hadn't O.D.'d on Metamucil.? Hell of a way to go...?Damn drugs cut down yet another rising star...... Poor Johnny.... Robert -See you in the Sage -?Braibish ________________________________ From: Joe Bevier To: steve-c at ix.netcom.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Thu, October 15, 2009 10:55:59 AM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? I've ever had a problem getting good cell reception there.? I do like green eggs and ham, I do like them Sam I am.? Slight preference for breakfast sausage though.? On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 10:15 AM, wrote: > Cell phones work fine at Brothers - well, most do.? Ham is for breakfast > and supplements eggs just dandy.? /Steve > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Christopher Guenther > >Sent: Oct 15, 2009 10:06 AM > >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > >Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? > > > >I understand there is most likely no cell reception it the Brothers launch > >site.? I also understand that many of our fellow rocketeers are HAM radio > >operators.? Is there? set frequency for the Brothers launch site?? The > >reason I ask is that my wife is worried that she will not be able to > contact > >me if there is an emergency here at home.? My dad being a HAM with a 70' > >tower and a directional in South Eastern Washington could put a call out > on > >that Frequency for me to go home asap in the event of an emergency.? My > dads > >call sign is WB7TLK. > >_______________________________________________ > >Rockets mailing list > >Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > -- Joe _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From gbhchrist at verizon.net Thu Oct 15 12:36:13 2009 From: gbhchrist at verizon.net (George Christ) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:36:13 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? In-Reply-To: <45717540910151055i46606d30qd19a4284b7a23c28@mail.gmail.com> References: <2074999.1255626909384.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <45717540910151055i46606d30qd19a4284b7a23c28@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6928809A69794CAB910C5BEA4C0DBDCB@LittleGoodBox> Sorry, no amateur sausage radio band...only a link. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Bevier" To: Cc: Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 10:55 AM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? > I've ever had a problem getting good cell reception there. I do like > green > eggs and ham, I do like them Sam I am. Slight preference for breakfast > sausage though. Is there a amateur sausage radio band? > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 10:15 AM, wrote: > >> Cell phones work fine at Brothers - well, most do. Ham is for breakfast >> and supplements eggs just dandy. /Steve >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >From: Christopher Guenther >> >Sent: Oct 15, 2009 10:06 AM >> >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? >> > >> >I understand there is most likely no cell reception it the Brothers >> >launch >> >site. I also understand that many of our fellow rocketeers are HAM >> >radio >> >operators. Is there set frequency for the Brothers launch site? The >> >reason I ask is that my wife is worried that she will not be able to >> contact >> >me if there is an emergency here at home. My dad being a HAM with a 70' >> >tower and a directional in South Eastern Washington could put a call out >> on >> >that Frequency for me to go home asap in the event of an emergency. My >> dads >> >call sign is WB7TLK. >> >_______________________________________________ >> >Rockets mailing list >> >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > > > -- > Joe > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Thu Oct 15 14:51:48 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:51:48 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? In-Reply-To: <6928809A69794CAB910C5BEA4C0DBDCB@LittleGoodBox> References: <2074999.1255626909384.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <45717540910151055i46606d30qd19a4284b7a23c28@mail.gmail.com> <6928809A69794CAB910C5BEA4C0DBDCB@LittleGoodBox> Message-ID: Well alrighty then! Does anyone know if T-Mobile gets a good reception at the Brothers Launch site? On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 12:36 PM, George Christ wrote: > Sorry, no amateur sausage radio band...only a link. > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Bevier" > To: > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 10:55 AM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? > > > > I've ever had a problem getting good cell reception there. I do like >> green >> eggs and ham, I do like them Sam I am. Slight preference for breakfast >> sausage though. Is there a amateur sausage radio band? >> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 10:15 AM, wrote: >> >> Cell phones work fine at Brothers - well, most do. Ham is for breakfast >>> and supplements eggs just dandy. /Steve >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> >From: Christopher Guenther >>> >Sent: Oct 15, 2009 10:06 AM >>> >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> >Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? >>> > >>> >I understand there is most likely no cell reception it the Brothers >>> >launch >>> >site. I also understand that many of our fellow rocketeers are HAM >>> >radio >>> >operators. Is there set frequency for the Brothers launch site? The >>> >reason I ask is that my wife is worried that she will not be able to >>> contact >>> >me if there is an emergency here at home. My dad being a HAM with a 70' >>> >tower and a directional in South Eastern Washington could put a call out >>> on >>> >that Frequency for me to go home asap in the event of an emergency. My >>> dads >>> >call sign is WB7TLK. >>> >_______________________________________________ >>> >Rockets mailing list >>> >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> > >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Joe >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From cpovercg at rocketmail.com Thu Oct 15 18:38:57 2009 From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com (cpovercg at rocketmail.com) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 01:38:57 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanted: 29mm seal disk Message-ID: <2105502026-1255657133-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-2027475811-@bda080.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> Any body else out there ever thrown away a seal disk with a spent motor? Well, I have. If you will be at Bro's this weekend with one for loan or sale please let me know off-list. Thx. Robert B. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry From greg at bigredbee.com Thu Oct 15 19:23:18 2009 From: greg at bigredbee.com (Greg Clark) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:23:18 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Brothers TRA Cert Flights Message-ID: I'll be on-site Friday afternoon no later than 3pm thru Sunday for all of your TRA certification needs. Joe, I can help out with the waiver on Saturday and Sunday. -- Greg From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Thu Oct 15 22:30:00 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 22:30:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? In-Reply-To: References: <2074999.1255626909384.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <45717540910151055i46606d30qd19a4284b7a23c28@mail.gmail.com> <6928809A69794CAB910C5BEA4C0DBDCB@LittleGoodBox> Message-ID: <6c829ff541cf0ab9af866fe3ee97494b.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> I seem to recall that in past years T-mobile has *not* had coverage at Brothers. Dunno about now, and I wouldn't bet much money on my memory about this. +McG+ > Well alrighty then! Does anyone know if T-Mobile gets a good reception at > the Brothers Launch site? > > > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 12:36 PM, George Christ > wrote: > >> Sorry, no amateur sausage radio band...only a link. >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Bevier" >> To: >> Cc: >> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 10:55 AM >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? >> >> >> >> I've ever had a problem getting good cell reception there. I do like >>> green >>> eggs and ham, I do like them Sam I am. Slight preference for breakfast >>> sausage though. Is there a amateur sausage radio band? >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 10:15 AM, wrote: >>> >>> Cell phones work fine at Brothers - well, most do. Ham is for >>> breakfast >>>> and supplements eggs just dandy. /Steve >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> >From: Christopher Guenther >>>> >Sent: Oct 15, 2009 10:06 AM >>>> >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> >Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober H.A.M. frequency? >>>> > >>>> >I understand there is most likely no cell reception it the Brothers >>>> >launch >>>> >site. I also understand that many of our fellow rocketeers are HAM >>>> >radio >>>> >operators. Is there set frequency for the Brothers launch site? >>>> The >>>> >reason I ask is that my wife is worried that she will not be able to >>>> contact >>>> >me if there is an emergency here at home. My dad being a HAM with a >>>> 70' >>>> >tower and a directional in South Eastern Washington could put a call >>>> out >>>> on >>>> >that Frequency for me to go home asap in the event of an emergency. >>>> My >>>> dads >>>> >call sign is WB7TLK. >>>> >_______________________________________________ >>>> >Rockets mailing list >>>> >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> > >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Joe >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Thu Oct 15 22:32:29 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 22:32:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Wanted: 29mm seal disk In-Reply-To: <2105502026-1255657133-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-202747 5811-@bda080.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> References: <2105502026-1255657133-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-2027475811-@bda080.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> Message-ID: > Any body else out there ever thrown away a seal disk with a spent motor? > Well, I have. If you will be at Bro's this weekend with one for loan or > sale please let me know off-list. Thx. > Robert B. > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry No, but came real close once. Had to fish it out of my garbage sack. +McG+ From Dunkman2000 at comcast.net Fri Oct 16 10:19:34 2009 From: Dunkman2000 at comcast.net (Mark Dunkle) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 10:19:34 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood Message-ID: I'm looking for a source of aircraft plywood in the Portland Vancouver area. I need .5 inch and .25 inch for fins and bulkhead material. I'm building my cert 3 project and I'd like to scratch buils as much as I can..................Mark From raystoner99 at comcast.net Fri Oct 16 10:27:39 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (raystoner99 at comcast.net) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:27:39 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1728308221.4523481255714059682.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Check with the hardwood suppliers in your area. They call it Baltic Birch ply. Aircraft plywood will usually get you there. It is metric (usually), so .5 inch and .25 inch don't really apply, but they tend to translate. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Dunkle" To: "rockets NW list" , "oroc list" Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 10:19:34 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood I'm looking for a source of aircraft plywood in the Portland Vancouver area. I need .5 inch and .25 inch for fins and bulkhead material. I'm building my cert 3 project and I'd like to scratch buils as much as I can..................Mark _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From MartyWeiser at comcast.net Fri Oct 16 11:07:12 2009 From: MartyWeiser at comcast.net (Marty Weiser) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:07:12 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <008d01ca4e8b$7dec76b0$79c56410$@net> Mark, I have had good luck getting Baltic birch plywood from Woodcraft (there is one in Tigard for you). They also carry Finnish birch plywood which is made with a bit better quality plys and exterior glue (it is also more expensive). True aircraft plywood is often a specialty product that is more expensive and made from more, thinner plys. From my perspective it is overkill for most of our projects. I use composites for bigger project if needed, but will use true aircraft plywood from the hobby shop for mid-power rockets that I plan to push hard since the higher number of plys are more stable in the thin plywood. Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Mark Dunkle Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 10:20 AM To: rockets NW list; oroc list Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood I'm looking for a source of aircraft plywood in the Portland Vancouver area. I need .5 inch and .25 inch for fins and bulkhead material. I'm building my cert 3 project and I'd like to scratch buils as much as I can..................Mark _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Dunkman2000 at comcast.net Fri Oct 16 12:22:13 2009 From: Dunkman2000 at comcast.net (Mark Dunkle) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:22:13 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] G10 or aircraft plywood Message-ID: <10FDBB1320094A4DA3C8BACCC53884CE@Desktop> I've considered G10 for the fins but seems to be hard to find exempt online. Does anyone know a supplier in The Portland, Vancouver area? I've used G10 on nearly all of my large rockets and was thinking of the plywood as a different option. I thought the wood was easier to find locally in the size I need rather than ship a sheet of G10. Nothing is set in stone yet>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Mark From Dunkman2000 at comcast.net Fri Oct 16 12:52:38 2009 From: Dunkman2000 at comcast.net (Mark Dunkle) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:52:38 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] [OROC Members] G10 or aircraft plywood In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20091016123356.00c46428@mail.iinet.com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20091016123356.00c46428@mail.iinet.com> Message-ID: <59A23EF843C94E78888D03CFE74F898B@Desktop> Paul, each fin has a root of 22 inches and a span of 7.5 inches and would be .125 thick. I would be interested if you have it Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Bogdanich To: Mark Dunkle Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:35 PM Subject: Re: [OROC Members] G10 or aircraft plywood What size sheet do you need? I have one that I bought for a project a long time ago that I never used that I could let you have at a good price. As a general matter though Port Plastics carries phenolic G10 and G12 sheet stock or can get it if they do not have it in inventory. At 12:22 PM 10/16/2009 -0700, you wrote: I've considered G10 for the fins but seems to be hard to find exempt online. Does anyone know a supplier in The Portland, Vancouver area? I've used G10 on nearly all of my large rockets and was thinking of the plywood as a different option. I thought the wood was easier to find locally in the size I need rather than ship a sheet of G10. Nothing is set in stone yet>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Mark _______________________________________________ Members mailing list Members at oregonrocketry.org http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/members From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Fri Oct 16 15:48:49 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 15:48:49 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Semi-Final Oregon Rocketry 2010 Flight Schedule Message-ID: Semi-Final Oregon Rocketry 2010 Flight Schedule The following is the semi-final flight schedule for the 2010 season. Please, as before, review the schedule. We are close to having it finalized, and need any serious concerns raised before we lock it in for next year. Most holidays are avoided. No new moons, effecting our vending. May - Spring Thunder (20,500 AGL w/ call in 35,500 AGL) May 21st - 23rd Friday - May 21st, TRA Research Only 8:00am - 10:00pm Saturday - May 22nd Commercial Motors, all welcome 8:00am - 10:00pm Sunday - May 23rd Commercial Motors, all welcome 8:00am - 3:00pm GSE Equipment Required; Trailer Hauling Needed Vending: Bob with Sunriver Nature Center & Observatory June - Summer Skies (20,500 AGL w/ call in 35,500 AGL) June 25th - 27th Friday - June 25th, TRA Research Only 8:00am - 10:00pm Saturday - June 26th Commercial Motors, all welcome 8:00am - 10:00pm Sunday - June 27th Commercial Motors, all welcome 8:00am - 3:00pm GSE Equipment Required; Trailer Hauling Needed Vending: Bob with Sunriver Nature Center & Observatory July - Desert Heat July 16th - 18th Friday - July 16th, TRA Research Only 8:00am - 10:00pm Saturday - July 17th Commercial Motors, all welcome 8:00am - 10:00pm Sunday - July 18th Commercial Motors, all welcome 8:00am - 3:00pm GSE Equipment Required; Trailer Hauling Needed Vending: Bob with Sunriver Nature Center & Observatory August - Desert EXtreme (20,500 AGL w/ call in 35,500 AGL, research motors to 75% AGL limit) August 13th - 15th Friday - August 13th TRA Research Only 8:00am - 10:00pm Saturday - August 14th TRA Research Only 8:00am - 10:00pm Sunday - August 15th TRA Research Only 8:00am - 3:00pm Bring Your Ground Support Equipment; No Trailer for this event No vending September - Fillible's Folly (5,400 AGL September 10th - 12th Friday - September 10th, Members Only Event Commercial Motors Only 8:00am - 10:00pm Saturday - September 11th Commercial Motors, all welcome 8:00am - 10:00pm Sunday - September 12th Commercial Motors, all welcome 8:00am - 3:00pm GSE Equipment Required; Trailer Hauling Needed Vending: Bob with Sunriver Nature Center & Observatory October - Rocketober (20,500 AGL w/ call in 35,500 AGL) October 8th - 10th Friday - October 8th, TRA Research Only 8:00am - 10:00pm Saturday - October 9th Commercial Motors, all welcome 8:00am - 10:00pm Sunday - October 10th Commercial Motors, all welcome 8:00am - 3:00pm GSE Equipment Required; Trailer Hauling Needed Vending: Bob with Sunriver Nature Center & Observatory Extra: TBD if this can be arranged and popular; June Fly-Off (35,500 AGL all weekend, a stretch but we'll try - all FAA can say is no) (Each team will have specially colored flight cards, the one team with the most total Newtons wins the fly-off) TBD Friday - TBD, TRA Research Only 8:00am - 10:00pm Saturday - TBD, TRA Research Only 8:00am - 10:00pm Sunday - TBD, Commercial Motors, all welcome 8:00am - 10:00pm Monday - TBD, Commercial Motors, all welcome 8:00am - 3:00pm GSE Equipment Required; Trailer Hauling Needed (This is a special new launch for Team BORG, Team Numb, Team Hardtail and other teams to join forces on Friday and throughout the weekend to put on a show. Others are welcome to fly. TRA members can fly Friday and Saturday, everyone else, commercial is Sunday and Monday. Vending: TBD From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Fri Oct 16 18:56:26 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 18:56:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood In-Reply-To: <008d01ca4e8b$7dec76b0$79c56410$@net> References: <008d01ca4e8b$7dec76b0$79c56410$@net> Message-ID: <39c4dda2034fd46d0a41c78f0b28d664.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Question: Can any of these high grade plywoods be shaped into curved surfaces by the usual methods of bending wood? (IOW slow deformation under force and moisture, or perhaps heat and pressure) +McG+ > Mark, > > I have had good luck getting Baltic birch plywood from Woodcraft (there is > one in Tigard for you). They also carry Finnish birch plywood which is > made > with a bit better quality plys and exterior glue (it is also more > expensive). True aircraft plywood is often a specialty product that is > more > expensive and made from more, thinner plys. From my perspective it is > overkill for most of our projects. I use composites for bigger project if > needed, but will use true aircraft plywood from the hobby shop for > mid-power > rockets that I plan to push hard since the higher number of plys are more > stable in the thin plywood. > > Marty > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Mark Dunkle > Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 10:20 AM > To: rockets NW list; oroc list > Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood > > I'm looking for a source of aircraft plywood in the Portland Vancouver > area. > I need .5 inch and .25 inch for fins and bulkhead material. I'm building > my > cert 3 project and I'd like to scratch buils as much as I > can..................Mark > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From MartyWeiser at comcast.net Fri Oct 16 19:25:14 2009 From: MartyWeiser at comcast.net (Marty Weiser) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 19:25:14 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood In-Reply-To: <39c4dda2034fd46d0a41c78f0b28d664.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> References: <008d01ca4e8b$7dec76b0$79c56410$@net> <39c4dda2034fd46d0a41c78f0b28d664.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Message-ID: <010601ca4ed1$0ff53520$2fdf9f60$@net> Thin pieces will warp if not stored in a manner that keeps them flat. I imagine that pieces under 1/4" can be curved, but probably not as much as well steamed wood. Marty -----Original Message----- From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 6:56 PM To: Marty Weiser Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood Question: Can any of these high grade plywoods be shaped into curved surfaces by the usual methods of bending wood? (IOW slow deformation under force and moisture, or perhaps heat and pressure) +McG+ > Mark, > > I have had good luck getting Baltic birch plywood from Woodcraft (there is > one in Tigard for you). They also carry Finnish birch plywood which is > made > with a bit better quality plys and exterior glue (it is also more > expensive). True aircraft plywood is often a specialty product that is > more > expensive and made from more, thinner plys. From my perspective it is > overkill for most of our projects. I use composites for bigger project if > needed, but will use true aircraft plywood from the hobby shop for > mid-power > rockets that I plan to push hard since the higher number of plys are more > stable in the thin plywood. > > Marty > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Mark Dunkle > Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 10:20 AM > To: rockets NW list; oroc list > Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood > > I'm looking for a source of aircraft plywood in the Portland Vancouver > area. > I need .5 inch and .25 inch for fins and bulkhead material. I'm building > my > cert 3 project and I'd like to scratch buils as much as I > can..................Mark > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Fri Oct 16 20:14:20 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 20:14:20 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood References: <008d01ca4e8b$7dec76b0$79c56410$@net> <39c4dda2034fd46d0a41c78f0b28d664.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Message-ID: With experience bending wood making furniture, you can bend plywood, but it's tougher. Most of the time I'll laminate with grains in the same direction. Shuffle a deck of cards, but only slide them together half way. Consider that as how the fiber grains are laid. Now shuffle another deck and slide them half way as well. Place that deck onto of the first, but turned 90 degrees. Grains in line with the bend will go easier. Those at a 90 will be tougher, and more apt to crack. Take a standard grade ply with 5 or 7 layers, you have either 2 or 3 at 90 degrees. With aircraft grade you get thinner plys, making it easier to bend. Because your stack of cards is thinner. But the number of layers at 90 degrees are increased. I've bent plywood, but have never been happy with the results. Laminated inline grain strips are much more controllable. Hope some of this made sense. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Marty Weiser" Cc: Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 6:56 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood > Question: > Can any of these high grade plywoods be shaped into curved surfaces by the > usual methods of bending wood? (IOW slow deformation under force and > moisture, or perhaps heat and pressure) > +McG+ > > >> Mark, >> >> I have had good luck getting Baltic birch plywood from Woodcraft (there >> is >> one in Tigard for you). They also carry Finnish birch plywood which is >> made >> with a bit better quality plys and exterior glue (it is also more >> expensive). True aircraft plywood is often a specialty product that is >> more >> expensive and made from more, thinner plys. From my perspective it is >> overkill for most of our projects. I use composites for bigger project >> if >> needed, but will use true aircraft plywood from the hobby shop for >> mid-power >> rockets that I plan to push hard since the higher number of plys are more >> stable in the thin plywood. >> >> Marty >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com >> [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >> On Behalf Of Mark Dunkle >> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 10:20 AM >> To: rockets NW list; oroc list >> Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood >> >> I'm looking for a source of aircraft plywood in the Portland Vancouver >> area. >> I need .5 inch and .25 inch for fins and bulkhead material. I'm building >> my >> cert 3 project and I'd like to scratch buils as much as I >> can..................Mark >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Fri Oct 16 20:26:51 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 20:26:51 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood Message-ID: BTW, If you want to bend plywood. Buy and store it in the garage for 6 months. As the fibers expand and contract under moisture and surface tention changes, it will bend. Maybe not the way you want. You might be able to control it, I've just not had much success. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Krausert" To: ; "Marty Weiser" Cc: Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 8:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood > With experience bending wood making furniture, you can bend plywood, but > it's tougher. Most of the time I'll laminate with grains in the same > direction. Shuffle a deck of cards, but only slide them together half way. > Consider that as how the fiber grains are laid. Now shuffle another deck > and slide them half way as well. Place that deck onto of the first, but > turned 90 degrees. Grains in line with the bend will go easier. Those at a > 90 will be tougher, and more apt to crack. Take a standard grade ply with > 5 or 7 layers, you have either 2 or 3 at 90 degrees. With aircraft grade > you get thinner plys, making it easier to bend. Because your stack of > cards is thinner. But the number of layers at 90 degrees are increased. > I've bent plywood, but have never been happy with the results. Laminated > inline grain strips are much more controllable. > > Hope some of this made sense. > > Cheers, > Robert > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: "Marty Weiser" > Cc: > Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 6:56 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood > > >> Question: >> Can any of these high grade plywoods be shaped into curved surfaces by >> the >> usual methods of bending wood? (IOW slow deformation under force and >> moisture, or perhaps heat and pressure) >> +McG+ >> >> >>> Mark, >>> >>> I have had good luck getting Baltic birch plywood from Woodcraft (there >>> is >>> one in Tigard for you). They also carry Finnish birch plywood which is >>> made >>> with a bit better quality plys and exterior glue (it is also more >>> expensive). True aircraft plywood is often a specialty product that is >>> more >>> expensive and made from more, thinner plys. From my perspective it is >>> overkill for most of our projects. I use composites for bigger project >>> if >>> needed, but will use true aircraft plywood from the hobby shop for >>> mid-power >>> rockets that I plan to push hard since the higher number of plys are >>> more >>> stable in the thin plywood. >>> >>> Marty >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com >>> [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >>> On Behalf Of Mark Dunkle >>> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 10:20 AM >>> To: rockets NW list; oroc list >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood >>> >>> I'm looking for a source of aircraft plywood in the Portland Vancouver >>> area. >>> I need .5 inch and .25 inch for fins and bulkhead material. I'm building >>> my >>> cert 3 project and I'd like to scratch buils as much as I >>> can..................Mark >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > From stefan_jones at comcast.net Fri Oct 16 21:20:40 2009 From: stefan_jones at comcast.net (stefan_jones at comcast.net) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:20:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <138943609.5043381255753240006.JavaMail.root@sz0038a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Micheal's craft store sells hobby plywood which comes pre-warped! It is specifically marked non-aircraft grade. From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Fri Oct 16 23:00:40 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 23:00:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <24e6dcdbce7d0687e2c4b20e02746cce.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Thanks to all who replied. I had done some searching the web and the general consensus was "not really" although there were a few claims of success. Didn't think it was likely based on how plywood is made but this list has a vast pool of experience and knowledge. And yes I have had experience with plywood stored in 'garage' conditions having a perverse desire to assume any shape but flat! But what I had in mind was much more significant complex curvature, and in the kind of high grade thin plywood used in aeromodels. I'm exploring options on a hush-hush top secret project for next year. Jack Hydrazine knows what I'm up to. ;-) Ok, it's not really secret. Just an attempt to get back to the kind of creative rocketry I once did. +McG+ > BTW, If you want to bend plywood. Buy and store it in the garage for 6 > months. As the fibers expand and contract under moisture and surface > tention > changes, it will bend. Maybe not the way you want. > > You might be able to control it, I've just not had much success. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Krausert" > To: ; "Marty Weiser" > > Cc: > Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 8:14 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood > > >> With experience bending wood making furniture, you can bend plywood, but >> it's tougher. Most of the time I'll laminate with grains in the same >> direction. Shuffle a deck of cards, but only slide them together half >> way. >> Consider that as how the fiber grains are laid. Now shuffle another deck >> and slide them half way as well. Place that deck onto of the first, but >> turned 90 degrees. Grains in line with the bend will go easier. Those at >> a >> 90 will be tougher, and more apt to crack. Take a standard grade ply >> with >> 5 or 7 layers, you have either 2 or 3 at 90 degrees. With aircraft grade >> you get thinner plys, making it easier to bend. Because your stack of >> cards is thinner. But the number of layers at 90 degrees are increased. >> I've bent plywood, but have never been happy with the results. Laminated >> inline grain strips are much more controllable. >> >> Hope some of this made sense. >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: >> To: "Marty Weiser" >> Cc: >> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 6:56 PM >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood >> >> >>> Question: >>> Can any of these high grade plywoods be shaped into curved surfaces by >>> the >>> usual methods of bending wood? (IOW slow deformation under force and >>> moisture, or perhaps heat and pressure) >>> +McG+ >>> >>> >>>> Mark, >>>> >>>> I have had good luck getting Baltic birch plywood from Woodcraft >>>> (there >>>> is >>>> one in Tigard for you). They also carry Finnish birch plywood which >>>> is >>>> made >>>> with a bit better quality plys and exterior glue (it is also more >>>> expensive). True aircraft plywood is often a specialty product that >>>> is >>>> more >>>> expensive and made from more, thinner plys. From my perspective it is >>>> overkill for most of our projects. I use composites for bigger >>>> project >>>> if >>>> needed, but will use true aircraft plywood from the hobby shop for >>>> mid-power >>>> rockets that I plan to push hard since the higher number of plys are >>>> more >>>> stable in the thin plywood. >>>> >>>> Marty >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com >>>> [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >>>> On Behalf Of Mark Dunkle >>>> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 10:20 AM >>>> To: rockets NW list; oroc list >>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood >>>> >>>> I'm looking for a source of aircraft plywood in the Portland Vancouver >>>> area. >>>> I need .5 inch and .25 inch for fins and bulkhead material. I'm >>>> building >>>> my >>>> cert 3 project and I'd like to scratch buils as much as I >>>> can..................Mark >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >> > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Fri Oct 16 23:06:22 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 23:06:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood In-Reply-To: <138943609.5043381255753240006.JavaMail.root@sz0038a.emeryville.ca.mai l.comcast.net> References: <138943609.5043381255753240006.JavaMail.root@sz0038a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <12c54e601ac5c4b1cfac5584001fe71d.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Heh heh. "What're we going to do with all this warped plywood?" "Call it a 'feature' and sell it for a higher price!" +McG+ > Micheal's craft store sells hobby plywood which comes pre-warped! > > It is specifically marked non-aircraft grade. > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From Mfreptiles at aol.com Sat Oct 17 08:22:44 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:22:44 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood Message-ID: The higher quality Finnish aircraft plywood cannot be formed due to the number of plys. That's the whole point; they are designed to be stable. The 3/16" we use is ten ply, and the 1/4" is twelve ply. I've never seen that stuff warp compared to the old five ply 3/16" that we used to use. The bendy stuff is called lite ply. It can be formed into curves, or you can always make your own shapes by using thin laminates and a press or vacuum bag like they make skateboard decks. Mike Fisher Binder Design In a message dated 10/16/2009 6:57:11 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com writes: Question: Can any of these high grade plywoods be shaped into curved surfaces by the usual methods of bending wood? (IOW slow deformation under force and moisture, or perhaps heat and pressure) +McG+ From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Sat Oct 17 22:37:22 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 22:37:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <841884c1d842ae908fa6ed26c2763d63.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> I saw mention of "Finnish" plywood during my web search. I was thinking that it might be good stuff for rockets... Glad to see better minds than mine already there! Right now I'm just looking at all conceivable options to keep in mind as the project progresses. I'll most likely use some kind of foam for the small prototypes. The larger final version would best benefit from carbon fiber, but even there formability is going to be an issue. I'm much better at the math end than the 'arts and crafts' part of translating ideas into hardware. A nice high precision 5-axis milling machine would be nice! Being so familiar with the way my great ideas work out, in the end it will probably ascend like a whiffle ball and glide like a brick. :( But I'm having fun working on this project. It's been a long time since I've done something new and challenging in rocketry. +McG+ > The higher quality Finnish aircraft plywood cannot be formed due to the > number of plys. That's the whole point; they are designed to be stable. > The > 3/16" we use is ten ply, and the 1/4" is twelve ply. I've never seen > that > stuff warp compared to the old five ply 3/16" that we used to use. > > The bendy stuff is called lite ply. It can be formed into curves, or you > can always make your own shapes by using thin laminates and a press or > vacuum bag like they make skateboard decks. > > Mike Fisher > Binder Design > > > In a message dated 10/16/2009 6:57:11 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com writes: > > Question: > Can any of these high grade plywoods be shaped into curved surfaces by > the > usual methods of bending wood? (IOW slow deformation under force and > moisture, or perhaps heat and pressure) > +McG+ > > > From rob at otisace.com Sat Oct 17 23:24:14 2009 From: rob at otisace.com (rob at otisace.com) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 23:24:14 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Looking for ride from Seattle to Mansfield for the Oct launch Message-ID: I'm looking for a ride from Seattle to Mansfield next weekend for the launch. I get out of class on Friday at 12:30 and can meet you at your house or en route. I can leave whenever on Sunday. I'll only have a backpack and will chip in for gas. Thanks! Rob Jopson From vincesimoneau at msn.com Sun Oct 18 01:06:09 2009 From: vincesimoneau at msn.com (Vince Simoneau) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 01:06:09 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone ever mix a glow powder into their finishing epoxy? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Chris, Mike has it right...alot of layers adds weight, Spray is light and thinner... Dave< how do you apply acitate and make sure its smooth> ? . . . Vinny > From: Mfreptiles at aol.com > Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:16:53 -0400 > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Anyone ever mix a glow powder into their finishing epoxy? > > Mix it into some clearcoat and spray it on. > > Mike F. > > > In a message dated 10/13/2009 4:08:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > guentherchristopher at gmail.com writes: > > I was looking at the powders at http://glowinc.com/ and I fully intend on > wearing my respirator mask when I do it. I plan to have a few layers of > hardened finish coat before I apply it. That way even if I over mix I do > not hurt the integrity of the airframe. If I under mix then I can always > wait till its dry enough to add another layer again and again until I get > the glow I want. > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _________________________________________________________________ Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222985/direct/01/ From bigrockets at verizon.net Sun Oct 18 10:56:34 2009 From: bigrockets at verizon.net (Dave Proffitt) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 10:56:34 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Glow powder Message-ID: <000c01ca501c$55a40780$00ec1680$@net> House of Kolor also has a glow powder but I don't think it lasts as long as the stuff I saw on United Nuclear's site. I'm wondering how dense this stuff is and if it actually dissolves on the molecular level or if it's like pearl platelets that remain suspended in the medium? When adding pearls to clear coats one has to be cautious as to how much goes in, especially in a small spray device such as a detail gun. It's easy to put in too much pearl in a four ounce cup, then it overpowers that coating. So I'm wondering how this stuff works in comparison to pearls? It would be interesting to put some of this glow powder into some marbelizer and see if the platelets pick it up. If it stays in suspension in tiny particles like the pearl does then they might pick it up. If that were the case the effect would be pretty striking when the lights went out. Maybe I'll play with this a little, Brad your Velociraptor might become radioactive? J Dave Proffitt From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Sun Oct 18 12:20:02 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 12:20:02 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood References: <841884c1d842ae908fa6ed26c2763d63.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Message-ID: <12F2296BFA2F44E0B606E2A4E1D4A361@LaptopKrausert> Ken, Consider the following idea. Create a carbon fiber airframe as your base. Go to any of the plywood manufacturers in the area and purchase either pine or birth unassembled plys. You can purchase ply sheets 1/16th and 1/32th of an inch. Very thin, very light, and easy to work. Get some waterproof laminating glue and paint roller. Place a thin coat on the CF airframe an on one side of the ply. Roll it, grains goind forward & aft. Roll the ply onto the CF airframe for one revelution. Then roll on liminating glue to the dry side of the rolled ply (so you have both bonding surfaces with glue) and continue rolling on the ply until you're happy with the thickness. Now with help from another person, begin covering the ply with width painting tape. Put this tape on in the same direction as your roll direction, and cover the entire airframe several times with the tape. This should secure it to dry. Cut the overlap of wood ply to be flush with the CF airframe. After several days of sitting at 68 degrees (inside), remove the tape. Use a 220 grit sandpaper and smooth it out nice. Get some wood filler and fill in all gaps and defects in the ply. 220 grit again until happy with smoothness, roundness, and uniform wall thickness. Just an idea for your secret project. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Cc: Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 10:37 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] aircraft plywood >I saw mention of "Finnish" plywood during my web search. I was thinking > that it might be good stuff for rockets... Glad to see better minds than > mine already there! > > Right now I'm just looking at all conceivable options to keep in mind as > the project progresses. I'll most likely use some kind of foam for the > small prototypes. The larger final version would best benefit from carbon > fiber, but even there formability is going to be an issue. I'm much > better at the math end than the 'arts and crafts' part of translating > ideas into hardware. > > A nice high precision 5-axis milling machine would be nice! > > Being so familiar with the way my great ideas work out, in the end it will > probably ascend like a whiffle ball and glide like a brick. :( > > But I'm having fun working on this project. It's been a long time since > I've done something new and challenging in rocketry. > +McG+ > > >> The higher quality Finnish aircraft plywood cannot be formed due to the >> number of plys. That's the whole point; they are designed to be stable. >> The >> 3/16" we use is ten ply, and the 1/4" is twelve ply. I've never seen >> that >> stuff warp compared to the old five ply 3/16" that we used to use. >> >> The bendy stuff is called lite ply. It can be formed into curves, or >> you >> can always make your own shapes by using thin laminates and a press or >> vacuum bag like they make skateboard decks. >> >> Mike Fisher >> Binder Design >> >> >> In a message dated 10/16/2009 6:57:11 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >> kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com writes: >> >> Question: >> Can any of these high grade plywoods be shaped into curved surfaces by >> the >> usual methods of bending wood? (IOW slow deformation under force and >> moisture, or perhaps heat and pressure) >> +McG+ >> >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From dmrandall at gmail.com Sun Oct 18 14:10:06 2009 From: dmrandall at gmail.com (Dave Randall) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 14:10:06 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone ever mix a glow powder into their finishing epoxy? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6bc920e40910181410o5954e04cka0c2c2bb016d62ba@mail.gmail.com> I'll give you the quick run-down, but I'm thinking I'll actually try out this glow powder on a rocket. When I do, I'll see if I can get a small little video together to go through my process for glass-smooth finishes with acetate and epoxy. In the mean time, here's the text version of what I do. Supplies (see end of mail for web site references to my supplies) : 4:1 Epoxy ShurLine roller and tray Chromaveil, fiberglass or other decorative cloth Spray adhesive 5 mil clear acetate Blue masking tape Hobby knife Your tube should have any fin slots already cut. If you are only putting a pigment coat on your rocket, and not a decorative cloth with clear epoxy, you should get a very lightweight fiberglass cloth to hold the epoxy. I usually hang my tube from a rod strung between two sawhorses. This provides a good working height. Cut a piece of acetate so that it fits around the tube with about a 1/2" overhang on the ends of the tube, and no more than an inch overlap the length of the tube. Cut your fabric the same size as the acetate. Mix epoxy - for a 7" tube that is 3' long, I used 200cc of epoxy total. Spray the spray adhesive on the tube and lay out the fabric on the tube. Smooth out all wrinkles, stretch the fabric if necessary. Cut the fabric overlap with a hobby knife. Pour on the epoxy liberally over the tube, one section at a time. Use the roller to soak the fabric evenly with epoxy for each section. Once you have the tube covered in a heavy coat of epoxy, take care to prevent drips. Your coat should be thick, but not "shiny wet" or drippy on the tube. Let the cloth remain soaked. Ensure you have soaked the ends of the cloth near the ends of your tube (I tend to miss some of these spots). Lay down one edge of the acetate along the length of the tube. Tape the ends of the acetate to the inside of the tube to prevent the acetate from slipping. Now, while looking for air bubbles, carefull press the acetate down and work the epoxy between the tube and the acetate towards you. Work any air bubbles out by pushing them towards you, and the open end of the acetate. You should be able to see the epoxy squeezing forward as you go. Turn the tube as you go, and keep all the air bubbles out. Any air bubbles will result in a rough finish, not what you want! Once you work your way all the way around the tube, adjust or cut the fabric if necessary to get the edges aligned. Tape the acetate down to hold the edges. It is NOT necessary to tightly wrap the acetate. You should have squeezed out any excess epoxy as you went. Now, sit back and relax while your epoxy hardens. Using some of the spare epoxy on the roller as a judge of hardness, check back regularly and see when the epoxy has hardened, but is still pliable. When the epoxy is the consistency of a fingernail, you're good to peel off the acetate. It will have some resistance, but should peel off cleanly. Use a hobby knife to cut the holes back out for your fins. Trim off the excess at the ends of your tube. It is MUCH easier to do while the epoxy is still pliable. Because the epoxy is still pliable, the finish can be damaged. Don't get your fingerprints in the epoxy! Let the epoxy fully harden and you're ready to go! You can sand the area around your fin slots to get a good fillet adhesion if necessary. The finish should be very glossy and very hard after full cure. This time of year, I just bring my tubes inside for final curing. Roller : http://www.shurline.com/PRODUCTS/CONVENIENCETOOLS/tabid/102/Default.aspx (Item #3000) Epoxy: http://www.tapplastics.com/shop/product.php?pid=29& Chromaveil: http://www.chromaveil.com/5012tub.html Acetate sheets: http://www.tapplastics.com/shop/product.php?pid=252& Spray adhesive: http://www.tapplastics.com/shop/product.php?pid=447& From rockets at sunrivernaturecenter.org Sun Oct 18 17:36:06 2009 From: rockets at sunrivernaturecenter.org (Bob Grossfeld) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:36:06 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Mansfield launch and motors from Sunriver....... Message-ID: Greetings all, I just got back from a wonderful day at the OROC launch in Brothers. Perfect weather! Tsolo is heading north on Tuesday, so he can deliver motors, electronics, accessories and kits to the Mansfield launch. If you need me to send motors up with him, I must have your order by early Tuesday morning, and payment arranged in advance. Which can be check, paypal or visa. This will allow for no hazmat fees!!! So get your order via email ASAP, as we only have one delivery!! This would include motors from Aerotech, CTI, Loki, Estes, Quest, and Roadrunner. For you CTI 54mm flyers, let me know what you need as, I have some special pricing on certain reloads! Electronics from Gwiz, Perfectfight and ARTS2 are all in stock. All motors have Sunriver sale pricing or get "quantity pricing", so act know, stock up for the winter, and get free delivery!!! Email us directly at rocketstore at earthlink.net or rockets at sunrivernaturecenter.org Thanks, Bob Sunriver Nature Center & Observatory From greg at blastzone.com Sun Oct 18 22:13:37 2009 From: greg at blastzone.com (Greg Deputy) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 22:13:37 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] AT 75/3840 case at mansfield this weekend? Message-ID: <058201ca507a$f6a4fb40$e3eef1c0$@com> Is anyone going to be at Mansfield this weekend (Saturday) that I could borrow an AT 75/3840 case from? Standard I lose it, I replace it policy applies, of course. From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 08:52:19 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 08:52:19 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Weather at Rocketober was excellent! Message-ID: The drive over the Santiam pass was majestic, and the drive back thru Prineville, Madras, then HWY 26 was also just as spectacular. The weather Friday was perfect, Saturday was also perfect with a bit of wind kicking up in the late afternoon. Sunday was a patchy low clouds with nice intermittent launch windows. Yet again the weather people must have been throwing darts at a weather board! The launches were awesome through out the weekend. From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 08:37:40 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 08:37:40 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Return from Rocketober Message-ID: I wish to thank everyone for all the help and advice this weekend. The patch I made and epoxied to the radiator of the van held the whole trip home. I did not have to stop anywhere. I thank everyone who left water, coolant, and anything else this weekend. A blown radiator out there is not a fun concept, but the Kevlar cloth and marine epoxy worked. I also lost the power steering which made for an intense drive home. A special thanks to Joe B., Tsolo, Robert B., Greg(beeline), Bob G., Bob W., and anyone else who helped me out this weekend. On the higher note My level 2 NAR certification flight went without a hitch, barring the fact I had to walk a little over to miles to retrieve it. I will have pics and videos up later this week but for now I am still unloading from the trip and resting a while. Chris Guenther From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 14:36:31 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:36:31 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] pics and a vid from Rocketober posted Message-ID: I posted a couple pics and a video from Rocketober 2009 From robert.krausert at intel.com Mon Oct 19 15:38:42 2009 From: robert.krausert at intel.com (Krausert, Robert) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:38:42 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] pics and a vid from Rocketober posted In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43C02B81@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Chris, First, I must call foul. I realize you're extremely happy right now, and I understand why. But I must still call foul. Did you at any time allow your kid to touch the flight card or rocket? The reason I ask is because adults rockets at Brothers never land (I mean never land) with the laundry on top of the sage, visible to all. Normally, the laundry lands on the ground and the little critters move it and hide it under the sage. Your laundry was clearly visible, and not fair. Only kids flying rockets get laundry on the sage. So my guess is your son touched the rocket, and the critters smelled it and placed the laundry nicely on top of the sage. Second, good video. Sounded like Jim Doherty doing LCO. I enjoyed his commentary, especially recovery. Third, and most important. Congratulations on a job well done. All joking aside, you did it. Welcome to level 2, and now - get out your credit card. Cheers, Robert -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 2:37 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] pics and a vid from Rocketober posted I posted a couple pics and a video from Rocketober 2009 _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Mon Oct 19 17:54:03 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:54:03 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares 1-X Rollout, Commentary, and Coverage Live! Monday 19OCT09/2101(9:01PM) PDT Message-ID: <4ADD0A2B.10709@earthlink.net> News article: http://www.floridatoday.com/content/blogs/space/2009/10/live-at-ksc-nasas-ares-i-x-rocket-ready.shtml Coverage starts on NASA TV at 8:45PDT with rollout of the Ares 1-X starting at 9:01PM. Watch here. http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html (both public and media channels) here. http://www.fromil.com/tv/index.php?radio=5 or here. http://www.floridatoday.com/content/blogs/space/livenasatv.shtml Launch of Ares X-1 scheduled for Tuesday 27OCT09/0500 PDT (8:00AM EDT). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ares_I-X From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Mon Oct 19 18:27:41 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:27:41 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Time lapse assembly of the Ares 1-X Message-ID: <4ADD120D.6070902@earthlink.net> They did skip the part where the motor segments are attached to one another but it is still interesting to watch. http://nasawatch.com/archives/2009/10/rolling-out-are.html Roger Ressmeyer did get to witness the static test of the ATK motor for the Ares 1-X last month. He posted a few photos here of his trip. http://www.sciencefaction.com/respages/Lightbox.asp?LightBox=141AA20A-9FC8-43FA-BCE4-828DF617F5A8 Robert From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Mon Oct 19 18:51:33 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:51:33 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November Message-ID: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your rockets ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third Sunday (8th or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a call to the LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? Robert From glech at aol.com Mon Oct 19 18:59:05 2009 From: glech at aol.com (Gary Lech) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 21:59:05 -0400 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November In-Reply-To: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net> References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <8CC1F4009D820BE-6698-206EF@webmail-d079.sysops.aol.com> It's a little too far for me. But heck, you gotta call it a "Turkey Shoot"! Cheers from ~ Gary Lech - WA7GL TRA Be sure to visit http://lech.is-a-geek.net -----Original Message----- From: Hammer To: NW Rocketry mailing list Sent: Mon, Oct 19, 2009 6:51 pm Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your rockets ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third Sunday (8th or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a call to the LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? Robert From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Mon Oct 19 19:09:29 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:09:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] pics and a vid from Rocketober posted In-Reply-To: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43C02B81@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com > References: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43C02B81@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: <5565e325189f9d1f993a516a42006199.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Y'know, at Brothers I have had the shock cord laid out across the sage but dang it Robert, come to think of it, I can't remember the parachute ever being on top of the sage! +McG+ > Chris, > First, I must call foul. I realize you're extremely happy right now, and I > understand why. But I must still call foul. Did you at any time allow your > kid to touch the flight card or rocket? The reason I ask is because adults > rockets at Brothers never land (I mean never land) with the laundry on top > of the sage, visible to all. Normally, the laundry lands on the ground and > the little critters move it and hide it under the sage. Your laundry was > clearly visible, and not fair. Only kids flying rockets get laundry on the > sage. So my guess is your son touched the rocket, and the critters smelled > it and placed the laundry nicely on top of the sage. > > Second, good video. Sounded like Jim Doherty doing LCO. I enjoyed his > commentary, especially recovery. > > Third, and most important. Congratulations on a job well done. All joking > aside, you did it. Welcome to level 2, and now - get out your credit card. > > Cheers, > Robert > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 2:37 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] pics and a vid from Rocketober posted > > I posted a couple pics and a video from Rocketober 2009 > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Mon Oct 19 19:38:13 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:38:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Return from Rocketober In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <556c5fbe5a5c43b96eb82c5881e06aab.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> I've found that at most large, organized launches the people there have enough stuff, tools, and knowledge they could probably even patch up a broken-down saucer and get those little gray guys safely on their way home to whichever galaxy. :) McGyver(sp?) ain't got nuthin' on a bunch of rocketers. +McG+ > I wish to thank everyone for all the help and advice this weekend. The > patch I made and epoxied to the radiator of the van held the whole trip > home. I did not have to stop anywhere. I thank everyone who left water, > coolant, and anything else this weekend. A blown radiator out there is > not > a fun concept, but the Kevlar cloth and marine epoxy worked. I also lost > the power steering which made for an intense drive home. > > A special thanks to Joe B., Tsolo, Robert B., Greg(beeline), Bob G., Bob > W., > and anyone else who helped me out this weekend. > > On the higher note My level 2 NAR certification flight went without a > hitch, > barring the fact I had to walk a little over to miles to retrieve it. I > will have pics and videos up later this week but for now I am still > unloading from the trip and resting a while. > > Chris Guenther > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From greg at bigredbee.com Mon Oct 19 20:00:27 2009 From: greg at bigredbee.com (Greg Clark) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:00:27 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Return from Rocketober In-Reply-To: <556c5fbe5a5c43b96eb82c5881e06aab.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> References: <556c5fbe5a5c43b96eb82c5881e06aab.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Message-ID: The cool thing was that Chris had all the stuff with him!!! On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 7:38 PM, wrote: > I've found that at most large, organized launches the people there have > enough stuff, tools, and knowledge they could probably even patch up a > broken-down saucer and get those little gray guys safely on their way home > to whichever galaxy. ?:) > > McGyver(sp?) ain't got nuthin' on a bunch of rocketers. > +McG+ > > >> I wish to thank everyone for all the help and advice this weekend. ?The >> patch I made and epoxied to the radiator of the van held the whole trip >> home. ?I did not have to stop anywhere. ?I thank everyone who left water, >> coolant, and anything else this weekend. ?A blown radiator out there is >> not >> a fun concept, but the Kevlar cloth and marine epoxy worked. ?I also lost >> the power steering which made for an intense drive home. >> >> A special thanks to Joe B., Tsolo, Robert B., Greg(beeline), Bob G., Bob >> W., >> and anyone else who helped me out this weekend. >> >> On the higher note My level 2 NAR certification flight went without a >> hitch, >> barring the fact I had to walk a little over to miles to retrieve it. ?I >> will have pics and videos up later this week but for now I am still >> unloading from the trip and resting a while. >> >> Chris Guenther >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From greg at blastzone.com Mon Oct 19 20:27:12 2009 From: greg at blastzone.com (Greg Deputy) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:27:12 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] waiver at mansfield this weekend? Message-ID: <0a8a01ca5135$3740ca70$a5c25f50$@com> Can someone refresh my memory on what the waiver is at the Mansfield launch this weekend? Assuming there's not a monsoon or a tornado I'm hoping to get my semiannual rocket fix. From davewalp at comcast.net Mon Oct 19 21:20:51 2009 From: davewalp at comcast.net (David Walp) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 21:20:51 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Newbies at Mansfield In-Reply-To: References: <001401ca3fe9$7a4061d0$6ec12570$@net> Message-ID: <000d01ca513c$b5830270$20890750$@net> Hi Carl, Can we send you a scan of the forms? (so that we don't forget them) See you Saturday! cheers, _dave_ From: Carl Hamilton [mailto:carl at mousetrap.com] Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 8:29 PM To: David Walp Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Newbies at Mansfield On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 8:12 PM, David Walp wrote: HI, My son and I are planning to attend the launch in Mansfield on 24-Oct (just Saturday because of other commitments on Sunday). In addition to a number of model rockets, we have three mid-power rockets we would like to fly. So what do we need to in order to fly? Motors. The launch is being hosted by Washington Aerospace Club. We will be collecting $10/family/weekend from non-members for range fees. If you have not attended a WAC launch this year, each attendee will also need to provide a signed liability waiver (http://www.washingtonaerospace.org/waiver_form.php). Other than that, you just need to show up ready to fly and have a good time. Looking forward to seeing you there. - Carl From bigredbee at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 21:39:08 2009 From: bigredbee at gmail.com (Greg Clark) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 21:39:08 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Google Earth flight data for my K695R flight Message-ID: Here's the .kml file (for Google Earth) for my K550 flight to 12K on Sunday morning. http://bigredbee.com/docs/blgps/flightdata/K7RKT_K695R_Oct_09.kml I think there were many rockets that landed at this same spot over the weekend -- at least 3 or 4 if I remember. It seems that I tend to launch the same type of rocket (dual deploy) to the same altitude (10-15K) at the same time (10am) and many of them land in almost the *exact* same spot. I'll have to dig up the data and generate a composite of all my flights (stretch goal) to prove my point. Some day..... -- Greg From Mfreptiles at aol.com Mon Oct 19 21:50:02 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 00:50:02 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] pics and a vid from Rocketober posted Message-ID: Funny story about that. I once came across a freshly landed rocket way out in the sage. It was well hidden between several bushes and I could tell it would be very hard to find. Because I was on my way out further to recover my own rocket, but wanted to make sure the owner found it, I perched the booster on one bush, the upper section on another bush, and the draped the chute neatly over the highest bush. Then I continued on my way. Later that night around the campfire, I heard one newly certed L2 rocketeer amazed at how his rocket landed to display itself for easy recovery. I chuckled to myself and didn't say a word. :) Mike F. In a message dated 10/19/2009 3:39:19 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, robert.krausert at intel.com writes: The reason I ask is because adults rockets at Brothers never land (I mean never land) with the laundry on top of the sage, visible to all. From joebevier at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 00:28:42 2009 From: joebevier at gmail.com (Joe Bevier) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 00:28:42 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] On board video from Rocketober Message-ID: <45717540910200028p121863bfxe51e871e4564d8ce@mail.gmail.com> Talk about green! See my Raptor video on a K805 from Rocketober. -Joe From MartyWeiser at comcast.net Tue Oct 20 07:38:13 2009 From: MartyWeiser at comcast.net (Marty Weiser) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 07:38:13 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] On board video from Rocketober In-Reply-To: <45717540910200028p121863bfxe51e871e4564d8ce@mail.gmail.com> References: <45717540910200028p121863bfxe51e871e4564d8ce@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002701ca5193$01b916b0$052b4410$@net> Joe - Very nice. I also liked the edit job on the video. - Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Joe Bevier Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 12:29 AM To: NW Rocketry mailing list Subject: [RocketsNW] On board video from Rocketober Talk about green! See my Raptor video on a K805 from Rocketober. -Joe _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 08:19:17 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:19:17 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] On board video from Rocketober In-Reply-To: <002701ca5193$01b916b0$052b4410$@net> References: <45717540910200028p121863bfxe51e871e4564d8ce@mail.gmail.com> <002701ca5193$01b916b0$052b4410$@net> Message-ID: Looking at the Mojave Green from that angle is diffidently different. Good editing. On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 7:38 AM, Marty Weiser wrote: > Joe - Very nice. I also liked the edit job on the video. - Marty > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Joe Bevier > Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 12:29 AM > To: NW Rocketry mailing list > Subject: [RocketsNW] On board video from Rocketober > > Talk about green! See my Raptor video on a K805 from Rocketober. > -Joe > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From rocfish74 at hotmail.com Tue Oct 20 08:54:00 2009 From: rocfish74 at hotmail.com (Mark Lyons) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:54:00 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] waiver at mansfield this weekend? In-Reply-To: <0a8a01ca5135$3740ca70$a5c25f50$@com> References: <0a8a01ca5135$3740ca70$a5c25f50$@com> Message-ID: Greg, I believe we have 8,000' at the racetrack and 14,000' at the away cell. At least that's what it was at FITS. See ya there, Mark > From: greg at blastzone.com > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:27:12 -0700 > Subject: [RocketsNW] waiver at mansfield this weekend? > > Can someone refresh my memory on what the waiver is at the Mansfield launch > this weekend? Assuming there's not a monsoon or a tornado I'm hoping to get > my semiannual rocket fix. > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft?s powerful SPAM protection. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/ From vonrang at yahoo.com Tue Oct 20 09:05:29 2009 From: vonrang at yahoo.com (Sam Grado) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:05:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] On board video from Rocketober In-Reply-To: <002701ca5193$01b916b0$052b4410$@net> Message-ID: <711507.50315.qm@web52212.mail.re2.yahoo.com> That was a very nice video that gives a good overview of what goes on at the pad prior to a great flight. ? The maintenance engineers at Country Oven Bakery got to watch it?from our conference room projector on the big screen. ? It received a lot of whoops, hollars?and applause! Sam Grado TRA L2 "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! sales at pvconly.com http://www.pvconly.com http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Joe Bevier Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 12:29 AM To: NW Rocketry mailing list Subject: [RocketsNW] On board video from Rocketober Talk about green!? See my Raptor video on a K805 from Rocketober. -Joe _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ? From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Tue Oct 20 10:50:15 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (steve-c at ix.netcom.com) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 10:50:15 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [RocketsNW] On board video from Rocketober Message-ID: <1248359.1256061016067.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Nice show Joe! If anyone hasn't seen Joe's handy-work before - the manner of docking the video-cam w/ alignment to the down-view mirror is top-notch - the general attention to detail in airframe construction and paint-work is second to none too. /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Joe Bevier >Sent: Oct 20, 2009 12:28 AM >To: NW Rocketry mailing list >Subject: [RocketsNW] On board video from Rocketober > >Talk about green! See my Raptor video on a K805 from Rocketober. >-Joe >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From Mfreptiles at aol.com Tue Oct 20 11:05:35 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:05:35 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] On board video from Rocketober Message-ID: Best part is: it's a Raptor! :) Mike F. In a message dated 10/20/2009 10:51:04 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, steve-c at ix.netcom.com writes: Nice show Joe! If anyone hasn't seen Joe's handy-work before - the manner of docking the video-cam w/ alignment to the down-view mirror is top-notch - the general attention to detail in airframe construction and paint-work is second to none too. /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Joe Bevier >Sent: Oct 20, 2009 12:28 AM >To: NW Rocketry mailing list >Subject: [RocketsNW] On board video from Rocketober > >Talk about green! See my Raptor video on a K805 from Rocketober. >-Joe >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From mikeandkimwyvel at comcast.net Tue Oct 20 12:37:45 2009 From: mikeandkimwyvel at comcast.net (mikeandkimwyvel at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:37:45 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] Reminder: WAC October Launch In-Reply-To: <998139244.6214781256067444166.JavaMail.root@sz0067a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <700142312.6215091256067465759.JavaMail.root@sz0067a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> This is a reminder that the WAC October launch is this weekend, Friday - Sunday October 23 - 25th. When: Friday, Saturday, and Sunday October 23 ? 25 th Where: The Sportsmans Club in Mansfield Washington Time: 8AM to 6PM.? Night launch Saturday Launch Director: Mike Wyvel and Robert Simpson Clark - We will be collecting $10/family/weekend from non-members for range fees. If you have not attended a WAC launch this year, each attendee will also need to provide a signed liability waiver ( http://www.washingtonaerospace.org/waiver_form.php ). - Mark Quinn has volunteered to bring the trailer over the mountains and back.? Thank you Mark!? He should arrive at the SPortsman's club around 3:00 PM. - Remember to sign up for launch duty.? The range will only open once all the shifts are filled. http://www.northwestrocketry.com/default.asp?page=http://www.northwestrocketry.com/launchsignup.asp . - Carl Hamilton will be available to give NAR L2 tests to anyone planning to cert over the weekend. - If you are planning to cert be sure you have all the necessary paperwork and/or witnesses lined up ahead of time.? -? Puget Sound Propulsion will be onsite.? However they will only be bringing pre-orders and will not be selling any reloads at the launch.? Contact them ASAP? to make sure they have what you need. -?The waiver will be activated for launching on Friday. As soon as one of the launch directors get there and the range is set up folks can fly.? I should be there about 4:00 PM. - Night launch on Saturday. - Camping available onsite as well as port pottys. _______________________________________________ members mailing list members at washingtonaerospace.org http://washingtonaerospace.org/mailman/listinfo/members_washingtonaerospace.org From sb at berfield.com Tue Oct 20 13:07:37 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:07:37 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] mansfield Message-ID: <200910202007.n9KK7dOP008956@omr11.networksolutionsemail.com> Ok, I am definitely coming out Sat for the day. Wasn't planning on flying anything, but, well, you know how it is... Anyone going to have AP if I decided to bring one bird? From mikeandkimwyvel at comcast.net Tue Oct 20 13:12:28 2009 From: mikeandkimwyvel at comcast.net (mikeandkimwyvel at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:12:28 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] mansfield In-Reply-To: <200910202007.n9KK7dOP008956@omr11.networksolutionsemail.com> Message-ID: <246845218.6234271256069548626.JavaMail.root@sz0067a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> You'll need to preorder with PSP if you are going to fly something and don't have any motors. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Berfield " < sb @ berfield .com> To: rockets@ rocketsnw .com Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 1:07:37 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [ RocketsNW ] mansfield Ok , I am definitely coming out Sat for the day. Wasn't planning on flying anything, but, well, you know how it is... Anyone going to have AP if I decided to bring one bird? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets@ rocketsnw .com http ://mx1. blastzone .com/mailman/ listinfo /rockets ?? From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 13:33:06 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:33:06 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] L2 cert video from Rocketober 2009 Message-ID: I have posted an edited version of my Cert video from 2009's Rocketober. In order not to hog the file space on northwestrockets image site I have loaded it to YouTube. You can see it by using this URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAAuqOkOVmM From eas0171 at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 21:37:45 2009 From: eas0171 at gmail.com (Eugene Samsonov) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:37:45 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Reminder: WAC October Launch In-Reply-To: <700142312.6215091256067465759.JavaMail.root@sz0067a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> References: <700142312.6215091256067465759.JavaMail.root@sz0067a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <55AF6CC3CC264D66A0C29772F84A36BB@STKTKSRV> Just to confirm, the launch will be at a site, different from that of FITS, right? Not at the dirt track, but rather somewhere East of Mansfield? -Eugene ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 12:37 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] Reminder: WAC October Launch > > > > > > This is a reminder that the WAC October launch is this weekend, Friday - > Sunday October 23 - 25th. > > > > When: Friday, Saturday, and Sunday October 23 ? 25 th > > Where: The Sportsmans Club in Mansfield Washington > > Time: 8AM to 6PM. Night launch Saturday > > Launch Director: Mike Wyvel and Robert Simpson Clark > > > > - We will be collecting $10/family/weekend from non-members for range > fees. If you have not attended a WAC launch this year, each attendee will > also need to provide a signed liability waiver ( > http://www.washingtonaerospace.org/waiver_form.php ). > > - Mark Quinn has volunteered to bring the trailer over the mountains and > back. Thank you Mark! He should arrive at the SPortsman's club around 3:00 > PM. > > - Remember to sign up for launch duty. The range will only open once all > the shifts are filled. > http://www.northwestrocketry.com/default.asp?page=http://www.northwestrocketry.com/launchsignup.asp . > > - Carl Hamilton will be available to give NAR L2 tests to anyone planning > to cert over the weekend. > > - If you are planning to cert be sure you have all the necessary paperwork > and/or witnesses lined up ahead of time. > > - Puget Sound Propulsion will be onsite. However they will only be > bringing pre-orders and will not be selling any reloads at the launch. > Contact them ASAP to make sure they have what you need. > > - The waiver will be activated for launching on Friday. As soon as one of > the launch directors get there and the range is set up folks can fly. I > should be there about 4:00 PM. > > - Night launch on Saturday. > > - Camping available onsite as well as port pottys. > > _______________________________________________ members mailing list > members at washingtonaerospace.org > http://washingtonaerospace.org/mailman/listinfo/members_washingtonaerospace.org > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From kent.newman at comcast.net Tue Oct 20 21:58:57 2009 From: kent.newman at comcast.net (Kent Newman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:58:57 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Reminder: WAC October Launch In-Reply-To: <55AF6CC3CC264D66A0C29772F84A36BB@STKTKSRV> References: <700142312.6215091256067465759.JavaMail.root@sz0067a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> <55AF6CC3CC264D66A0C29772F84A36BB@STKTKSRV> Message-ID: <000001ca520b$32fa68f0$98ef3ad0$@newman@comcast.net> No, the Sportsman's Club IS the site of FITS and will be the site of this weekend's launch. Originally scheduled to be held at the Snell Ranch, east of town, the venue had to be changed due to a conflict with the hunting season. The owner allows hunters on the land. Kent -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Eugene Samsonov Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 9:38 PM To: mikeandkimwyvel at comcast.net; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Reminder: WAC October Launch Just to confirm, the launch will be at a site, different from that of FITS, right? Not at the dirt track, but rather somewhere East of Mansfield? -Eugene ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 12:37 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] Reminder: WAC October Launch > > > > > > This is a reminder that the WAC October launch is this weekend, Friday - > Sunday October 23 - 25th. > > > > When: Friday, Saturday, and Sunday October 23 ? 25 th > > Where: The Sportsmans Club in Mansfield Washington > > Time: 8AM to 6PM. Night launch Saturday > > Launch Director: Mike Wyvel and Robert Simpson Clark > > > > - We will be collecting $10/family/weekend from non-members for range > fees. If you have not attended a WAC launch this year, each attendee will > also need to provide a signed liability waiver ( > http://www.washingtonaerospace.org/waiver_form.php ). > > - Mark Quinn has volunteered to bring the trailer over the mountains and > back. Thank you Mark! He should arrive at the SPortsman's club around 3:00 > PM. > > - Remember to sign up for launch duty. The range will only open once all > the shifts are filled. > http://www.northwestrocketry.com/default.asp?page=http://www.northwestrocketry.com/launchsignup.asp . > > - Carl Hamilton will be available to give NAR L2 tests to anyone planning > to cert over the weekend. > > - If you are planning to cert be sure you have all the necessary paperwork > and/or witnesses lined up ahead of time. > > - Puget Sound Propulsion will be onsite. However they will only be > bringing pre-orders and will not be selling any reloads at the launch. > Contact them ASAP to make sure they have what you need. > > - The waiver will be activated for launching on Friday. As soon as one of > the launch directors get there and the range is set up folks can fly. I > should be there about 4:00 PM. > > - Night launch on Saturday. > > - Camping available onsite as well as port pottys. > > _______________________________________________ members mailing list > members at washingtonaerospace.org > http://washingtonaerospace.org/mailman/listinfo/members_washingtonaerospace.org > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From carl at mousetrap.com Tue Oct 20 21:57:02 2009 From: carl at mousetrap.com (Carl Hamilton) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:57:02 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Reminder: WAC October Launch In-Reply-To: <55AF6CC3CC264D66A0C29772F84A36BB@STKTKSRV> References: <700142312.6215091256067465759.JavaMail.root@sz0067a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> <55AF6CC3CC264D66A0C29772F84A36BB@STKTKSRV> Message-ID: Eugene - The launch is at the same site as FITS, just west of town at the dirt track. The white building at the site is known as the Sportmen's Club. - Carl On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 9:37 PM, Eugene Samsonov wrote: > Just to confirm, the launch will be at a site, different from that of > FITS, right? Not at the dirt track, but rather somewhere East of Mansfield? > > -Eugene > > ----- Original Message ----- From: > To: > Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 12:37 PM > Subject: [RocketsNW] Reminder: WAC October Launch > > > > >> >> >> >> >> This is a reminder that the WAC October launch is this weekend, Friday - >> Sunday October 23 - 25th. >> >> >> >> When: Friday, Saturday, and Sunday October 23 ? 25 th >> >> Where: The Sportsmans Club in Mansfield Washington >> >> Time: 8AM to 6PM. Night launch Saturday >> >> Launch Director: Mike Wyvel and Robert Simpson Clark >> >> >> >> - We will be collecting $10/family/weekend from non-members for range >> fees. If you have not attended a WAC launch this year, each attendee will >> also need to provide a signed liability waiver ( >> http://www.washingtonaerospace.org/waiver_form.php ). >> >> - Mark Quinn has volunteered to bring the trailer over the mountains and >> back. Thank you Mark! He should arrive at the SPortsman's club around 3:00 >> PM. >> >> - Remember to sign up for launch duty. The range will only open once all >> the shifts are filled. >> http://www.northwestrocketry.com/default.asp?page=http://www.northwestrocketry.com/launchsignup.asp. >> >> - Carl Hamilton will be available to give NAR L2 tests to anyone planning >> to cert over the weekend. >> >> - If you are planning to cert be sure you have all the necessary paperwork >> and/or witnesses lined up ahead of time. >> >> - Puget Sound Propulsion will be onsite. However they will only be >> bringing pre-orders and will not be selling any reloads at the launch. >> Contact them ASAP to make sure they have what you need. >> >> - The waiver will be activated for launching on Friday. As soon as one of >> the launch directors get there and the range is set up folks can fly. I >> should be there about 4:00 PM. >> >> - Night launch on Saturday. >> >> - Camping available onsite as well as port pottys. >> >> _______________________________________________ members mailing list >> members at washingtonaerospace.org >> http://washingtonaerospace.org/mailman/listinfo/members_washingtonaerospace.org >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From icknic at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 09:27:19 2009 From: icknic at gmail.com (Bolton) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 09:27:19 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] escape weight Message-ID: <51E6BE1C13F84E24A5327F5A1F033CA6@BoltonFamPC> Could someone help with the my question at bottom to Greg? He suggested to address the group forum. From Greg: I've got absolutely NO idea whatsoever!!! But, I'm sure if you wander on over to the NorthwestRocketry email list (www.northwestrocketry.com), you'll get some opinions!!! -- Greg On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Bolton wrote: > Greg, > Got your name off http://www.tripoli.org/prefecture/prefusor.shtml > and have a technical question beyond me. Launching from a weather balloon > platform (65,000 to 100,000 altitude), what would the minimum rocket > weight required to escape earths gravity and hit the moon, assuming a 6lb > (or pick an easy math number) load? What started this thought was Google's > X Prize and some initial investigations into rocketry (I'm electrical), but > the variables (mass, fuel type thrust to variable weight ratio as it burns, > air density, etc) are too great for me to rule of thumb it. > > Another company in Chandler, AZ launches recoverable radio equipment > (http://www.spacedata.net/company.html) on weather balloons with a 6lb > load. Now I am not saying I'm going to enter the Google contest, but it > would be fun to hit the moon and send some pics back, yes? And at minimum > it is fun to stretch the brain in new ways through the thought experiment. > > So what's your feeling, feasible or not? > > > Thanks, > -Ross Bolton From pmschurke at seattleschools.org Wed Oct 21 09:47:16 2009 From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org (Schurke, Peter) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 09:47:16 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? Message-ID: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10942DBB0@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> Thrustcurve.org has a RASP file but not RockSim. One of my students is planning to use the motor for her L2 cert flight at Mansfield this weekend. We'd like to give it a few sims with the real motor file instead of the "closest motor we could find" approach. Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St Seattle, WA 98133 From raystoner99 at comcast.net Wed Oct 21 09:55:43 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (raystoner99 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:55:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] escape weight In-Reply-To: <51E6BE1C13F84E24A5327F5A1F033CA6@BoltonFamPC> Message-ID: <2102654576.6240831256144143029.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> With a 6 lbs payload, I don't think you can get there from here. Passive stabilization at 100kft is going to take some LARGE fins, not much air up there. Active stabilization is the best answer. Escape velocity for earth is almost 7 miles per second. Getting that kind of speed out of a 6lbs rocket is going to be tough. I was on the aRocket mailing list years ago and this was a topic of discussion, you may want to look in their archives, or even sign up and start the discussion. There are many that are on the list that have the computational skills to do this. Why limit yourself to the 6 lbs limit? You are going to have to get government permission for the launch anyway, and the paper work associated with that permit process will pretty much make that 6 lbs limit a drop in the ocean. Sub orbital class III flights are a pain to file for, I would imagine that orbital flights are at least an order of magnitude harder and extra-orbital flights...pby exponentially harder. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bolton" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:27:19 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight Could someone help with the my question at bottom to Greg? He suggested to address the group forum. >From Greg: I've got absolutely NO idea whatsoever!!! But, I'm sure if you wander on over to the NorthwestRocketry email list (www.northwestrocketry.com), you'll get some opinions!!! -- Greg On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Bolton wrote: > Greg, > Got your name off http://www.tripoli.org/prefecture/prefusor.shtml > and have a technical question beyond me. Launching from a weather balloon > platform (65,000 to 100,000 altitude), what would the minimum rocket > weight required to escape earths gravity and hit the moon, assuming a 6lb > (or pick an easy math number) load? What started this thought was Google's > X Prize and some initial investigations into rocketry (I'm electrical), but > the variables (mass, fuel type thrust to variable weight ratio as it burns, > air density, etc) are too great for me to rule of thumb it. > > Another company in Chandler, AZ launches recoverable radio equipment > (http://www.spacedata.net/company.html) on weather balloons with a 6lb > load. Now I am not saying I'm going to enter the Google contest, but it > would be fun to hit the moon and send some pics back, yes? And at minimum > it is fun to stretch the brain in new ways through the thought experiment. > > So what's your feeling, feasible or not? > > > Thanks, > -Ross Bolton _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From raystoner99 at comcast.net Wed Oct 21 10:00:30 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (raystoner99 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 17:00:30 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? In-Reply-To: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10942DBB0@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> Message-ID: <767117502.6243271256144430656.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Aerotech has it. http://www.aerotech-rocketry.com/resources.aspx?id=8 Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Schurke" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:47:16 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? Thrustcurve.org has a RASP file but not RockSim. One of my students is planning to use the motor for her L2 cert flight at Mansfield this weekend. We'd like to give it a few sims with the real motor file instead of the "closest motor we could find" approach. Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St Seattle, WA 98133 _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Simpsonclark at aol.com Wed Oct 21 10:08:48 2009 From: Simpsonclark at aol.com (Simpsonclark at aol.com) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 13:08:48 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] escape weight Message-ID: I hope someone comes up with the elegant formulae, but in rough numbers, while the balloon eliminates the need to push a lot of air aside, the big energy cost is in acceleration. Briefly, orbit is achieved by speeding up and pitching over until the space craft is traveling around the earth at a speed (about 17,800 mph) such that the force of gravity is balanced by centripetal force. After that, the orbit is raised by accelerating further, until at about 25,000 mph centripetal force exceeds gravity and the object no longer falls back toward earth. That is the minimum escape velocity. It is not correct that the orbiting spacecraft has no gravity, it is the balance of centripetal force and gravity that gives the effect of no gravity. Technically, a floating astronaut is in perpetual free-fall. A very rough idea of the energy involved in putting a spacecraft into orbit can be calculated using the formula for momentum (which can be expressed as the total impulse required) which is Momentum=1/2( Mass X Velocity squared) Since velocity is high, the squared part is a killer. Just to make it rougher, you have to add an average of about a half G thrust to balance gravity and also account for the mass of the booster as it accelerates, since that also must be done. A simple iterative routine on a spread sheet can easily rough out the numbers, or you can look at early rockets, like Explorer I (the upper stage looks like one of our larger projects) then work back down the stages to stage 1. It hasn't gotten easier since the '50's. Actually, extra speed is better than just altitude. The X-15, Pegasus and Spaceship 1 all launched fron 30,000 feet + and 500 or 600 mph rather than the 100,000 + feet a balloon could reach cheaper. Copy me if you get a nice mathematical treatment. -Robert Simpson-Clark In a message dated 10/21/2009 9:33:36 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, icknic at gmail.com writes: Could someone help with the my question at bottom to Greg? He suggested to address the group forum. >From Greg: I've got absolutely NO idea whatsoever!!! But, I'm sure if you wander on over to the NorthwestRocketry email list (www.northwestrocketry.com), you'll get some opinions!!! -- Greg On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Bolton wrote: > Greg, > Got your name off http://www.tripoli.org/prefecture/prefusor.shtml > and have a technical question beyond me. Launching from a weather balloon > platform (65,000 to 100,000 altitude), what would the minimum rocket > weight required to escape earths gravity and hit the moon, assuming a 6lb > (or pick an easy math number) load? What started this thought was Google's > X Prize and some initial investigations into rocketry (I'm electrical), but > the variables (mass, fuel type thrust to variable weight ratio as it burns, > air density, etc) are too great for me to rule of thumb it. > > Another company in Chandler, AZ launches recoverable radio equipment > (http://www.spacedata.net/company.html) on weather balloons with a 6lb > load. Now I am not saying I'm going to enter the Google contest, but it > would be fun to hit the moon and send some pics back, yes? And at minimum > it is fun to stretch the brain in new ways through the thought experiment. > > So what's your feeling, feasible or not? > > > Thanks, > -Ross Bolton _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com Wed Oct 21 10:23:45 2009 From: john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com (john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 10:23:45 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] escape weight In-Reply-To: <51E6BE1C13F84E24A5327F5A1F033CA6@BoltonFamPC> References: <51E6BE1C13F84E24A5327F5A1F033CA6@BoltonFamPC> Message-ID: <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841D492DA4A@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> Assuming zero drag, a 3 kg pound payload(a total mass of 40 kg at burn-out), a propellant mass fraction of 90%, and an ISP of 250, the rocket would weigh about 4000 kg. You can do better than an ISP of 250 with liquid propellant, but this a reasonable upper end for solids. John -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bolton Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:27 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight Could someone help with the my question at bottom to Greg? He suggested to address the group forum. From Greg: I've got absolutely NO idea whatsoever!!! But, I'm sure if you wander on over to the NorthwestRocketry email list (www.northwestrocketry.com), you'll get some opinions!!! -- Greg On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Bolton wrote: > Greg, > Got your name off http://www.tripoli.org/prefecture/prefusor.shtml > and have a technical question beyond me. Launching from a weather balloon > platform (65,000 to 100,000 altitude), what would the minimum rocket > weight required to escape earths gravity and hit the moon, assuming a 6lb > (or pick an easy math number) load? What started this thought was Google's > X Prize and some initial investigations into rocketry (I'm electrical), but > the variables (mass, fuel type thrust to variable weight ratio as it burns, > air density, etc) are too great for me to rule of thumb it. > > Another company in Chandler, AZ launches recoverable radio equipment > (http://www.spacedata.net/company.html) on weather balloons with a 6lb > load. Now I am not saying I'm going to enter the Google contest, but it > would be fun to hit the moon and send some pics back, yes? And at minimum > it is fun to stretch the brain in new ways through the thought experiment. > > So what's your feeling, feasible or not? > > > Thanks, > -Ross Bolton _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From pmschurke at seattleschools.org Wed Oct 21 10:54:41 2009 From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org (Schurke, Peter) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 10:54:41 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? In-Reply-To: <767117502.6243271256144430656.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> References: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10942DBB0@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> <767117502.6243271256144430656.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10942DBB1@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> I'd already downloaded that file and it does not contain the J250FJ. I think I read somewhere that RockSim will run a RASP file? True? Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St Seattle, WA 98133 ________________________________ From: raystoner99 at comcast.net [mailto:raystoner99 at comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:01 AM To: Schurke, Peter Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? Aerotech has it. http://www.aerotech-rocketry.com/resources.aspx?id=8 Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Schurke" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:47:16 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? Thrustcurve.org has a RASP file but not RockSim. One of my students is planning to use the motor for her L2 cert flight at Mansfield this weekend. We'd like to give it a few sims with the real motor file instead of the "closest motor we could find" approach. Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St Seattle, WA 98133 _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From raystoner99 at comcast.net Wed Oct 21 10:55:59 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (raystoner99 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 17:55:59 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? In-Reply-To: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10942DBB1@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> Message-ID: <432424786.6268251256147759698.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> I DL'd the version from RockSim 7, and it was included. Its a 54mm motor, if that helps. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Schurke" To: raystoner99 at comcast.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:54:41 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? I'd already downloaded that file and it does not contain the J250FJ. I think I read somewhere that RockSim will run a RASP file? True? Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St Seattle, WA 98133 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net [mailto:raystoner99 at comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:01 AM To: Schurke, Peter Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? Aerotech has it. http://www.aerotech-rocketry.com/resources.aspx?id=8 Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Schurke" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:47:16 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? Thrustcurve.org has a RASP file but not RockSim. One of my students is planning to use the motor for her L2 cert flight at Mansfield this weekend. We'd like to give it a few sims with the real motor file instead of the "closest motor we could find" approach. Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St Seattle, WA 98133 _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 11:22:37 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 11:22:37 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober 2009 compilation video Message-ID: I loaded a compilation of the weekends events. It is loaded at YouTube Url http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqANamQGi6k From jhadv at pacifier.com Wed Oct 21 11:32:58 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (Paul Bogdanich) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 11:32:58 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] escape weight (Bolton) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20091021112459.00c2a3e0@mail.iinet.com> As I understand the math the mass of the object is immaterial so long as it is measurably greater than zero. For example we can hit the moon with photons all day long. For an object with considerably more mass than a photon though what matters is the velocity. Once it escapes orbit it does not have any "weight" anyway all it has is mass. So once you have a target mass what you need to do is work backward to figure how to get that little puppy up to 17,500 mph at about 350,000 feet ASl. Once you do all that the object is gone forever until an unless it encounters an object with much more mass and gets captured. Other than that it will go forever. So all you have to do is aim properly and hit escape velocity at reasonable altitude and it's see ya. To hit the moon with a multi pound object about the easiest thing to do would be to launch a gun of sorts into near orbit or fractional orbit aim the gun at moon intercept an fire having the projectile hit the moon. That would take less fuel. It would cost a ton though. I would estimate at least a million dollars if you did everything on the cheap. From raystoner99 at comcast.net Wed Oct 21 12:08:34 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (raystoner99 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:08:34 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] escape weight (Bolton) In-Reply-To: <1660973700.6299901256151735363.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <1349836894.6303011256152114400.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Paul, you made a few small errors. Orbital velocity is what you mention below. Escape velocity is near 25,000 mph. Anyplace you have a gravitational force, you have "weight". Everyplace in the universe gravitational force, so you always have weight...it could be very, very small, but its still there. 17,500 mph at 350,000 feet is pretty fast. There is enough atmosphere at that altitude to cause significant heating. Even the ISS is subject to some small atmospheric drag...enough that they have to raise the altitude periodically. And finally, the gun you bring to orbit would have to be pretty substantial, adding a velocity of about 7500 mph (assuming you are in orbit and trying to reach escape velocity) is beyond the reach of all "guns" that I'm aware of. In a quick Google search the record muzzle velocity (that they'll tell us about) of a military rail gun is 2520 meters per second...that works out to 5637 mph...well below the speed needed for escape velocity. The rail gun isn't small either. There are some cool photos of the projectile here; http://thetension.blogspot.com/2008/02/additional-imagery-world-record-navy.html Not picking on you. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Bogdanich" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 11:32:58 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight (Bolton) As I understand the math the mass of the object is immaterial so long as it is measurably greater than zero. For example we can hit the moon with photons all day long. For an object with considerably more mass than a photon though what matters is the velocity. Once it escapes orbit it does not have any "weight" anyway all it has is mass. So once you have a target mass what you need to do is work backward to figure how to get that little puppy up to 17,500 mph at about 350,000 feet ASl. Once you do all that the object is gone forever until an unless it encounters an object with much more mass and gets captured. Other than that it will go forever. So all you have to do is aim properly and hit escape velocity at reasonable altitude and it's see ya. To hit the moon with a multi pound object about the easiest thing to do would be to launch a gun of sorts into near orbit or fractional orbit aim the gun at moon intercept an fire having the projectile hit the moon. That would take less fuel. It would cost a ton though. I would estimate at least a million dollars if you did everything on the cheap. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From MartyWeiser at comcast.net Wed Oct 21 12:28:41 2009 From: MartyWeiser at comcast.net (Marty Weiser) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 12:28:41 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? In-Reply-To: <432424786.6268251256147759698.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> References: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10942DBB1@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> <432424786.6268251256147759698.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <00d201ca5284$b31048b0$1930da10$@net> Peter - I just downloaded the RASP file and it ran just fine in version 7 of Rocksim. - Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of raystoner99 at comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:56 AM To: Peter Schurke Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? I DL'd the version from RockSim 7, and it was included. Its a 54mm motor, if that helps. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Schurke" To: raystoner99 at comcast.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:54:41 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? I'd already downloaded that file and it does not contain the J250FJ. I think I read somewhere that RockSim will run a RASP file? True? Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St Seattle, WA 98133 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net [mailto:raystoner99 at comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:01 AM To: Schurke, Peter Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? Aerotech has it. http://www.aerotech-rocketry.com/resources.aspx?id=8 Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Schurke" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:47:16 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? Thrustcurve.org has a RASP file but not RockSim. One of my students is planning to use the motor for her L2 cert flight at Mansfield this weekend. We'd like to give it a few sims with the real motor file instead of the "closest motor we could find" approach. Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St Seattle, WA 98133 _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From MartyWeiser at comcast.net Wed Oct 21 12:32:14 2009 From: MartyWeiser at comcast.net (Marty Weiser) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 12:32:14 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] escape weight (Bolton) In-Reply-To: <1349836894.6303011256152114400.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> References: <1660973700.6299901256151735363.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> <1349836894.6303011256152114400.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <00d301ca5285$31cf2ef0$956d8cd0$@net> Isn't Paul's concept what we call to multistage rocket with the gun replaced with a smaller upper stage? It is easier to get very high velocity with a long slow push from a rocket motor than a short hard one from a gun. -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of raystoner99 at comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 12:09 PM To: Paul Bogdanich Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight (Bolton) Paul, you made a few small errors. Orbital velocity is what you mention below. Escape velocity is near 25,000 mph. Anyplace you have a gravitational force, you have "weight". Everyplace in the universe gravitational force, so you always have weight...it could be very, very small, but its still there. 17,500 mph at 350,000 feet is pretty fast. There is enough atmosphere at that altitude to cause significant heating. Even the ISS is subject to some small atmospheric drag...enough that they have to raise the altitude periodically. And finally, the gun you bring to orbit would have to be pretty substantial, adding a velocity of about 7500 mph (assuming you are in orbit and trying to reach escape velocity) is beyond the reach of all "guns" that I'm aware of. In a quick Google search the record muzzle velocity (that they'll tell us about) of a military rail gun is 2520 meters per second...that works out to 5637 mph...well below the speed needed for escape velocity. The rail gun isn't small either. There are some cool photos of the projectile here; http://thetension.blogspot.com/2008/02/additional-imagery-world-record-navy. html Not picking on you. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Bogdanich" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 11:32:58 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight (Bolton) As I understand the math the mass of the object is immaterial so long as it is measurably greater than zero. For example we can hit the moon with photons all day long. For an object with considerably more mass than a photon though what matters is the velocity. Once it escapes orbit it does not have any "weight" anyway all it has is mass. So once you have a target mass what you need to do is work backward to figure how to get that little puppy up to 17,500 mph at about 350,000 feet ASl. Once you do all that the object is gone forever until an unless it encounters an object with much more mass and gets captured. Other than that it will go forever. So all you have to do is aim properly and hit escape velocity at reasonable altitude and it's see ya. To hit the moon with a multi pound object about the easiest thing to do would be to launch a gun of sorts into near orbit or fractional orbit aim the gun at moon intercept an fire having the projectile hit the moon. That would take less fuel. It would cost a ton though. I would estimate at least a million dollars if you did everything on the cheap. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From pmschurke at seattleschools.org Wed Oct 21 12:44:59 2009 From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org (Schurke, Peter) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 12:44:59 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? In-Reply-To: <00d201ca5284$b31048b0$1930da10$@net> References: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10942DBB1@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> <432424786.6268251256147759698.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> <00d201ca5284$b31048b0$1930da10$@net> Message-ID: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10942DBB2@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> Okay, now I feel silly. I went through every line of J motors in the batch of files I downloaded from the AT site and the J250 is actually in there...it's just hiding down below the J1999. Everything else is in alphanumeric order by motor code, but not the J250...it wants to play hide and seek. Thanks to Marty and Ray for their suggestions. Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St Seattle, WA 98133 -----Original Message----- From: Marty Weiser [mailto:MartyWeiser at comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 12:29 PM To: raystoner99 at comcast.net; Schurke, Peter Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? Peter - I just downloaded the RASP file and it ran just fine in version 7 of Rocksim. - Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of raystoner99 at comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:56 AM To: Peter Schurke Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? I DL'd the version from RockSim 7, and it was included. Its a 54mm motor, if that helps. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Schurke" To: raystoner99 at comcast.net Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:54:41 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? I'd already downloaded that file and it does not contain the J250FJ. I think I read somewhere that RockSim will run a RASP file? True? Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St Seattle, WA 98133 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net [mailto:raystoner99 at comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:01 AM To: Schurke, Peter Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? Aerotech has it. http://www.aerotech-rocketry.com/resources.aspx?id=8 Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Schurke" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:47:16 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [RocketsNW] Anyone know where I could find a RockSim file for the AT J250FJ? Thrustcurve.org has a RASP file but not RockSim. One of my students is planning to use the motor for her L2 cert flight at Mansfield this weekend. We'd like to give it a few sims with the real motor file instead of the "closest motor we could find" approach. Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St Seattle, WA 98133 _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From joebevier at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 15:53:54 2009 From: joebevier at gmail.com (Joe Bevier) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:53:54 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] escape weight In-Reply-To: <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841D492DA4A@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> References: <51E6BE1C13F84E24A5327F5A1F033CA6@BoltonFamPC> <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841D492DA4A@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> Message-ID: <45717540910211553u21f4dc8cx366182d154d09851@mail.gmail.com> Gravity, friction . . . About 25,000 mph should do it. After escaping this rocket would be coasting and slowly decelerating all the way out to about 190,000 miles where the moon's gravity becomes stronger than the earth's and it begins positive acceleration again. Small vector problems would become so great in magnitude you'd need some form of active guidance system. Governments get very nervous when people want to put active guidance systems in rockets. Hit the moon -or land on it and send pictures back? Sounds like more mass than 3 kg. Fun to think about though. On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:23 AM, wrote: > Assuming zero drag, a 3 kg pound payload(a total mass of 40 kg at > burn-out), a propellant mass fraction of 90%, and an ISP of 250, the rocket > would weigh about 4000 kg. You can do better than an ISP of 250 with liquid > propellant, but this a reasonable upper end for solids. > > John > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Bolton > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:27 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight > > Could someone help with the my question at bottom to Greg? He suggested to > address the group forum. > > > From Greg: > I've got absolutely NO idea whatsoever!!! > > But, I'm sure if you wander on over to the NorthwestRocketry email > list (www.northwestrocketry.com), you'll get some opinions!!! > > -- Greg > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Bolton wrote: > > Greg, > > Got your name off http://www.tripoli.org/prefecture/prefusor.shtml > > and have a technical question beyond me. Launching from a weather > balloon > > platform (65,000 to 100,000 altitude), what would the minimum rocket > > weight required to escape earths gravity and hit the moon, assuming a > 6lb > > (or pick an easy math number) load? What started this thought was > Google's > > X Prize and some initial investigations into rocketry (I'm electrical), > but > > the variables (mass, fuel type thrust to variable weight ratio as it > burns, > > air density, etc) are too great for me to rule of thumb it. > > > > Another company in Chandler, AZ launches recoverable radio equipment > > (http://www.spacedata.net/company.html) on weather balloons with a 6lb > > load. Now I am not saying I'm going to enter the Google contest, but it > > would be fun to hit the moon and send some pics back, yes? And at > minimum > > it is fun to stretch the brain in new ways through the thought > experiment. > > > > So what's your feeling, feasible or not? > > > > > > Thanks, > > -Ross Bolton > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From Mfreptiles at aol.com Wed Oct 21 16:02:05 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:02:05 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] escape weight Message-ID: That's over four tons. Hope you have a big balloon. Mike F. In a message dated 10/21/2009 10:24:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com writes: Assuming zero drag, a 3 kg pound payload(a total mass of 40 kg at burn-out), a propellant mass fraction of 90%, and an ISP of 250, the rocket would weigh about 4000 kg. You can do better than an ISP of 250 with liquid propellant, but this a reasonable upper end for solids. John -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bolton Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:27 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight Could someone help with the my question at bottom to Greg? He suggested to address the group forum. >From Greg: I've got absolutely NO idea whatsoever!!! But, I'm sure if you wander on over to the NorthwestRocketry email list (www.northwestrocketry.com), you'll get some opinions!!! -- Greg On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Bolton wrote: > Greg, > Got your name off http://www.tripoli.org/prefecture/prefusor.shtml > and have a technical question beyond me. Launching from a weather balloon > platform (65,000 to 100,000 altitude), what would the minimum rocket > weight required to escape earths gravity and hit the moon, assuming a 6lb > (or pick an easy math number) load? What started this thought was Google's > X Prize and some initial investigations into rocketry (I'm electrical), but > the variables (mass, fuel type thrust to variable weight ratio as it burns, > air density, etc) are too great for me to rule of thumb it. > > Another company in Chandler, AZ launches recoverable radio equipment > (http://www.spacedata.net/company.html) on weather balloons with a 6lb > load. Now I am not saying I'm going to enter the Google contest, but it > would be fun to hit the moon and send some pics back, yes? And at minimum > it is fun to stretch the brain in new ways through the thought experiment. > > So what's your feeling, feasible or not? > > > Thanks, > -Ross Bolton _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com Wed Oct 21 16:09:10 2009 From: john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com (john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:09:10 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] escape weight In-Reply-To: <45717540910211553u21f4dc8cx366182d154d09851@mail.gmail.com> References: <51E6BE1C13F84E24A5327F5A1F033CA6@BoltonFamPC> <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841D492DA4A@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> <45717540910211553u21f4dc8cx366182d154d09851@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841D492DB34@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> The 40 kg. mass would include the motor casing needed to contain 3500 kg. of propellant. This in of itself would be a technical accomplishment in my book. John ________________________________ From: Joe Bevier [mailto:joebevier at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 3:54 PM To: Lyngdal, John W Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight Gravity, friction . . . About 25,000 mph should do it. After escaping this rocket would be coasting and slowly decelerating all the way out to about 190,000 miles where the moon's gravity becomes stronger than the earth's and it begins positive acceleration again. Small vector problems would become so great in magnitude you'd need some form of active guidance system. Governments get very nervous when people want to put active guidance systems in rockets. Hit the moon -or land on it and send pictures back? Sounds like more mass than 3 kg. Fun to think about though. On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:23 AM, > wrote: Assuming zero drag, a 3 kg pound payload(a total mass of 40 kg at burn-out), a propellant mass fraction of 90%, and an ISP of 250, the rocket would weigh about 4000 kg. You can do better than an ISP of 250 with liquid propellant, but this a reasonable upper end for solids. John -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bolton Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:27 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight Could someone help with the my question at bottom to Greg? He suggested to address the group forum. From Greg: I've got absolutely NO idea whatsoever!!! But, I'm sure if you wander on over to the NorthwestRocketry email list (www.northwestrocketry.com), you'll get some opinions!!! -- Greg On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Bolton wrote: > Greg, > Got your name off http://www.tripoli.org/prefecture/prefusor.shtml > and have a technical question beyond me. Launching from a weather balloon > platform (65,000 to 100,000 altitude), what would the minimum rocket > weight required to escape earths gravity and hit the moon, assuming a 6lb > (or pick an easy math number) load? What started this thought was Google's > X Prize and some initial investigations into rocketry (I'm electrical), but > the variables (mass, fuel type thrust to variable weight ratio as it burns, > air density, etc) are too great for me to rule of thumb it. > > Another company in Chandler, AZ launches recoverable radio equipment > (http://www.spacedata.net/company.html) on weather balloons with a 6lb > load. Now I am not saying I'm going to enter the Google contest, but it > would be fun to hit the moon and send some pics back, yes? And at minimum > it is fun to stretch the brain in new ways through the thought experiment. > > So what's your feeling, feasible or not? > > > Thanks, > -Ross Bolton _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From raystoner99 at comcast.net Wed Oct 21 17:07:40 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (raystoner99 at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 00:07:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] escape weight In-Reply-To: <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841D492DB34@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> Message-ID: <2065102054.6441111256170060535.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> at a 90% mass fraction, wouldn't that be a 400kg case/payload? Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "john w lyngdal" To: joebevier at gmail.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 4:09:10 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight The 40 kg. mass would include the motor casing needed to contain 3500 kg. of propellant. This in of itself would be a technical accomplishment in my book. John ________________________________ From: Joe Bevier [mailto:joebevier at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 3:54 PM To: Lyngdal, John W Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight Gravity, friction . . . About 25,000 mph should do it. After escaping this rocket would be coasting and slowly decelerating all the way out to about 190,000 miles where the moon's gravity becomes stronger than the earth's and it begins positive acceleration again. Small vector problems would become so great in magnitude you'd need some form of active guidance system. Governments get very nervous when people want to put active guidance systems in rockets. Hit the moon -or land on it and send pictures back? Sounds like more mass than 3 kg. Fun to think about though. On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:23 AM, > wrote: Assuming zero drag, a 3 kg pound payload(a total mass of 40 kg at burn-out), a propellant mass fraction of 90%, and an ISP of 250, the rocket would weigh about 4000 kg. You can do better than an ISP of 250 with liquid propellant, but this a reasonable upper end for solids. John -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bolton Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:27 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight Could someone help with the my question at bottom to Greg? He suggested to address the group forum. >From Greg: I've got absolutely NO idea whatsoever!!! But, I'm sure if you wander on over to the NorthwestRocketry email list (www.northwestrocketry.com), you'll get some opinions!!! -- Greg On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Bolton wrote: > Greg, > Got your name off http://www.tripoli.org/prefecture/prefusor.shtml > and have a technical question beyond me. Launching from a weather balloon > platform (65,000 to 100,000 altitude), what would the minimum rocket > weight required to escape earths gravity and hit the moon, assuming a 6lb > (or pick an easy math number) load? What started this thought was Google's > X Prize and some initial investigations into rocketry (I'm electrical), but > the variables (mass, fuel type thrust to variable weight ratio as it burns, > air density, etc) are too great for me to rule of thumb it. > > Another company in Chandler, AZ launches recoverable radio equipment > (http://www.spacedata.net/company.html) on weather balloons with a 6lb > load. Now I am not saying I'm going to enter the Google contest, but it > would be fun to hit the moon and send some pics back, yes? And at minimum > it is fun to stretch the brain in new ways through the thought experiment. > > So what's your feeling, feasible or not? > > > Thanks, > -Ross Bolton _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From nat at natmote.net Wed Oct 21 18:42:48 2009 From: nat at natmote.net (Nat Mote) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 18:42:48 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Mansfield Launch Site Coordinates Message-ID: Hello all, I found coordinates which I believe to be for the Mansfield launch site this weekend by looking at the map of the Sportsman Club location on the WAC website. They are 47.81750 N 119.65600 W Could somebody verify these? I don't want to get the wrong coordinates, and last time I was in a car looking for a Mansfield launch site it got a little bit... interesting. Thank you, Nat From gbhchrist at verizon.net Wed Oct 21 19:11:48 2009 From: gbhchrist at verizon.net (George Christ) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:11:48 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November In-Reply-To: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net> References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the county (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a launch so they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was preferable to them and they said the 15th. Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I can keep them informed. Thanks! George ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November > Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your rockets > ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third Sunday > (8th or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a call > to the LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. > > And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? > > Robert > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Wed Oct 21 19:34:01 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:34:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] escape weight In-Reply-To: <51E6BE1C13F84E24A5327F5A1F033CA6@BoltonFamPC> References: <51E6BE1C13F84E24A5327F5A1F033CA6@BoltonFamPC> Message-ID: <5669d755e085e4620dfac025ea7ed8e8.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> As others have replied, the rocket's initial mass would be some tons. Exact numbers depend on a bunch of details, what propellants, motor designs, assumptions about minimum required guidance system mass, etc. But at least several tons under the most wildly optimistic assumptions about miniaturization. There was a lengthy discussion on the aRocket list years ago about a similar problem: What is the smallest size for a rocket able to put a satellite in orbit? I had always figured around 2000 lbs, but better minds showed that by using a high altitude launch from a fighter jet it might be as low as 500 pounds. This was for a satellite the size of a matchbox. A balloon launched rocket able to put 6 lbs on the lunar surface would necessarily be much bigger. One guy did an interesting twist on the question and demonstrated that there was a minimum *length* for a ground-launched minimal satellite launch vehicle, around 30-40 feet, independent of mass or diameter(might have been Randall Clague). This was consistent with a launcher used by the British, in one of their few actual national satellite launches, of about 28 feet. IIRC its name was Blue something, and used hydrogen peroxide. As for sending back pictures from the moon, many long years ago while I was musing about amateurs eventually getting to that level it occurred to me that a CCD camera with pinhole optics would work just dandy on the lunar surface. Now there's cheap off the shelf 'spy' cameras just about like that--just look at the cameras in cell phones. The lander itself could be tiny if you could link to other spacecraft in lunar orbit for your communications. I don't think a six-pound lander is impossible today, but you're not going to get it there with a balloon launched rocket. +McG+ > Could someone help with the my question at bottom to Greg? He suggested > to address the group forum. > > > From Greg: > I've got absolutely NO idea whatsoever!!! > > But, I'm sure if you wander on over to the NorthwestRocketry email > list (www.northwestrocketry.com), you'll get some opinions!!! > > -- Greg > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Bolton wrote: > > Greg, > > Got your name off http://www.tripoli.org/prefecture/prefusor.shtml > > and have a technical question beyond me. Launching from a weather > balloon > > platform (65,000 to 100,000 altitude), what would the minimum rocket > > weight required to escape earths gravity and hit the moon, assuming a > 6lb > > (or pick an easy math number) load? What started this thought was > Google's > > X Prize and some initial investigations into rocketry (I'm > electrical), but > > the variables (mass, fuel type thrust to variable weight ratio as it > burns, > > air density, etc) are too great for me to rule of thumb it. > > > > Another company in Chandler, AZ launches recoverable radio equipment > > (http://www.spacedata.net/company.html) on weather balloons with a 6lb > > load. Now I am not saying I'm going to enter the Google contest, but > it > > would be fun to hit the moon and send some pics back, yes? And at > minimum > > it is fun to stretch the brain in new ways through the thought > experiment. > > > > So what's your feeling, feasible or not? > > > > > > Thanks, > > -Ross Bolton > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From dmrandall at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 19:31:20 2009 From: dmrandall at gmail.com (Dave Randall) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:31:20 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Mansfield Launch Site Coordinates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6bc920e40910211931r4d3d52a9j9a4c4cbf6156ad6a@mail.gmail.com> Looks right to me. When I put those coordinates in maps.google.com it points to the center of the race track (the launch site) Of course, you'll turn off HWY 172 into the sportsmans club at that location, and not drive on the track. But yes, those coordinates will get you to the launch site. Dave On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Nat Mote wrote: > Hello all, > I found coordinates which I believe to be for the Mansfield launch site this > weekend by looking at the map of the Sportsman Club location on the WAC > website. They are > 47.81750 N > 119.65600 W > Could somebody verify these? I don't want to get the wrong coordinates, and > last time I was in a car looking for a Mansfield launch site it got a little > bit... interesting. > > Thank you, > Nat > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > -- - Dave From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Wed Oct 21 20:47:13 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 20:47:13 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November In-Reply-To: <6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com> References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net> <5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox> <6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4ADFD5C1.7070309@earthlink.net> The Turkey Shoot Launch will be held on the15th. Since the Sun sets earlier how about 9AM to 5PM? If the Cub Scouts attend we will certainly need a few extra volunteers to help them out. ;) Robert Dave Randall wrote: > My suggestion: > > Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) > > Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! > > dave > > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ wrote: > >> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the county >> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a launch so >> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >> >> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I can >> keep them informed. >> >> Thanks! >> >> George >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >> >> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> >> >> >>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your rockets >>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third Sunday (8th >>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a call to the >>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>> >>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>> >>> Robert >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> > > > > From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Wed Oct 21 21:24:36 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 21:24:36 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November In-Reply-To: <5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox> References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net> <5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox> Message-ID: <4ADFDE84.2080409@earthlink.net> Maybe we could get a Trunk Monkey to help the Cub Scouts out! LOL! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8avOiTUcD4Y Robert George Christ wrote: > There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the > county (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending > a launch so they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two > dates was preferable to them and they said the 15th. > > Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I > can keep them informed. > > Thanks! > > George > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" > > To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" > Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM > Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November > > >> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >> rockets ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or >> third Sunday (8th or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now >> before I make a call to the LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best >> for you. >> >> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >> >> Robert >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > From daron at daronjohnson.com Wed Oct 21 18:45:49 2009 From: daron at daronjohnson.com (Daron Johnson) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 18:45:49 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] [personal] Mansfield Launch Site Coordinates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000601ca52b9$635172b0$29f45810$@com> Yup. That's it. -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Nat Mote Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 6:43 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [personal] [RocketsNW] Mansfield Launch Site Coordinates Hello all, I found coordinates which I believe to be for the Mansfield launch site this weekend by looking at the map of the Sportsman Club location on the WAC website. They are 47.81750 N 119.65600 W Could somebody verify these? I don't want to get the wrong coordinates, and last time I was in a car looking for a Mansfield launch site it got a little bit... interesting. Thank you, Nat _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com Thu Oct 22 08:37:11 2009 From: john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com (john.w.lyngdal at tektronix.com) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:37:11 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] escape weight In-Reply-To: <2065102054.6441111256170060535.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> References: <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841D492DB34@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> <2065102054.6441111256170060535.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <1299DB772C141340B34631B5C0F5368841D492DBFC@us-bv-m11.global.tektronix.net> Yes it would. I guess the rocket is going to get a lot heavier. John ________________________________ From: raystoner99 at comcast.net [mailto:raystoner99 at comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 5:08 PM To: Lyngdal, John W Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com; joebevier at gmail.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight at a 90% mass fraction, wouldn't that be a 400kg case/payload? Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "john w lyngdal" To: joebevier at gmail.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 4:09:10 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight The 40 kg. mass would include the motor casing needed to contain 3500 kg. of propellant. This in of itself would be a technical accomplishment in my book. John ________________________________ From: Joe Bevier [mailto:joebevier at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 3:54 PM To: Lyngdal, John W Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight Gravity, friction . . . About 25,000 mph should do it. After escaping this rocket would be coasting and slowly decelerating all the way out to about 190,000 miles where the moon's gravity becomes stronger than the earth's and it begins positive acceleration again. Small vector problems would become so great in magnitude you'd need some form of active guidance system. Governments get very nervous when people want to put active guidance systems in rockets. Hit the moon -or land on it and send pictures back? Sounds like more mass than 3 kg. Fun to think about though. On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:23 AM, > wrote: Assuming zero drag, a 3 kg pound payload(a total mass of 40 kg at burn-out), a propellant mass fraction of 90%, and an ISP of 250, the rocket would weigh about 4000 kg. You can do better than an ISP of 250 with liquid propellant, but this a reasonable upper end for solids. John -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bolton Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:27 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] escape weight Could someone help with the my question at bottom to Greg? He suggested to address the group forum. From Greg: I've got absolutely NO idea whatsoever!!! But, I'm sure if you wander on over to the NorthwestRocketry email list (www.northwestrocketry.com), you'll get some opinions!!! -- Greg On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Bolton wrote: > Greg, > Got your name off http://www.tripoli.org/prefecture/prefusor.shtml > and have a technical question beyond me. Launching from a weather balloon > platform (65,000 to 100,000 altitude), what would the minimum rocket > weight required to escape earths gravity and hit the moon, assuming a 6lb > (or pick an easy math number) load? What started this thought was Google's > X Prize and some initial investigations into rocketry (I'm electrical), but > the variables (mass, fuel type thrust to variable weight ratio as it burns, > air density, etc) are too great for me to rule of thumb it. > > Another company in Chandler, AZ launches recoverable radio equipment > (http://www.spacedata.net/company.html) on weather balloons with a 6lb > load. Now I am not saying I'm going to enter the Google contest, but it > would be fun to hit the moon and send some pics back, yes? And at minimum > it is fun to stretch the brain in new ways through the thought experiment. > > So what's your feeling, feasible or not? > > > Thanks, > -Ross Bolton _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From mkquinn at gmail.com Thu Oct 22 14:18:21 2009 From: mkquinn at gmail.com (Mark Quinn) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:18:21 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Reminder: WAC October Launch In-Reply-To: <700142312.6215091256067465759.JavaMail.root@sz0067a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> References: <998139244.6214781256067444166.JavaMail.root@sz0067a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> <700142312.6215091256067465759.JavaMail.root@sz0067a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <5a1085980910221418r35a4021bg43079e418e9e595d@mail.gmail.com> Could someone please verify the ball hitch size for the trailer? Dan was pretty sure it was 2", which is what I have. If it's something else I'll go pick one up. Thanks. Mark On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 12:37 PM, wrote: > > > > > > This is a reminder that the WAC October launch is this weekend, Friday - > Sunday October 23 - 25th. > > > > When: Friday, Saturday, and Sunday October 23 ? 25 th > > Where: The Sportsmans Club in Mansfield Washington > > Time: 8AM to 6PM. Night launch Saturday > > Launch Director: Mike Wyvel and Robert Simpson Clark > > > > - We will be collecting $10/family/weekend from non-members for range fees. > If you have not attended a WAC launch this year, each attendee will also > need to provide a signed liability waiver ( > http://www.washingtonaerospace.org/waiver_form.php ). > > - Mark Quinn has volunteered to bring the trailer over the mountains and > back. Thank you Mark! He should arrive at the SPortsman's club around 3:00 > PM. > > - Remember to sign up for launch duty. The range will only open once all > the shifts are filled. > http://www.northwestrocketry.com/default.asp?page=http://www.northwestrocketry.com/launchsignup.asp. > > - Carl Hamilton will be available to give NAR L2 tests to anyone planning > to cert over the weekend. > > - If you are planning to cert be sure you have all the necessary paperwork > and/or witnesses lined up ahead of time. > > - Puget Sound Propulsion will be onsite. However they will only be > bringing pre-orders and will not be selling any reloads at the launch. > Contact them ASAP to make sure they have what you need. > > - The waiver will be activated for launching on Friday. As soon as one of > the launch directors get there and the range is set up folks can fly. I > should be there about 4:00 PM. > > - Night launch on Saturday. > > - Camping available onsite as well as port pottys. > > _______________________________________________ members mailing list > members at washingtonaerospace.org > http://washingtonaerospace.org/mailman/listinfo/members_washingtonaerospace.org > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From ryan98391 at gmail.com Thu Oct 22 21:29:16 2009 From: ryan98391 at gmail.com (Ryan Williams) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:29:16 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Holden's Hobbies will be at the Fall launch Message-ID: Hello, this is Ryan Williams. Chris Holden could not attend the fall launch. I will be representing him at the launch. I will have a large selection of Estes/quest kits, many mid ranged kits from Mad Cow and PML. Also I will have motors ranging in size from A to E, I'll have some blue tube and other scratch building material. I hope to be at the launch on Friday night. From ryan98391 at gmail.com Thu Oct 22 21:25:01 2009 From: ryan98391 at gmail.com (Ryan Williams) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:25:01 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Where is the Fall Launch going to be? Message-ID: I assumed there would be information on the website as to the location of the fall launch in Mansfield Washington, but the club website lists the launch site as the sportman's ranch. Is the launch being held here or at Snell? From carl at mousetrap.com Thu Oct 22 21:48:24 2009 From: carl at mousetrap.com (Carl Hamilton) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:48:24 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Where is the Fall Launch going to be? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ryan - The launch will be at the Sportmen's Club. - Carl On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Ryan Williams wrote: > I assumed there would be information on the website as to the location of > the fall launch in Mansfield Washington, but the club website lists the > launch site as the sportman's ranch. Is the launch being held here or at > Snell? > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From t.j.doll at att.net Fri Oct 23 10:37:38 2009 From: t.j.doll at att.net (t.j.doll at att.net) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:37:38 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] SpaceCAD Message-ID: <102320091737.12108.4AE1E9E20009CB6200002F4C22218675169B0A02D29B9B0EBF0404010BD206D29B@att.net> I just found out that I won the EMRR "Rocket Family" photo contest (WooHoo!) so I get first pick of the prizes. The two prizes I find of interest are the Art Applewhite Flying Saucer kit and the SpaceCAD software. The problem is I don't know much of anything about SpaceCAD. I currently have and use RockSim (although it's an older version - I've been thinking of buying an update) - is there any reason why I'd want to switch to SpaceCAD instead? TIA Tim From sethwallace1 at rocketmail.com Sat Oct 24 16:20:07 2009 From: sethwallace1 at rocketmail.com (Seth Wallace) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 16:20:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] XPRS In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <156634.87363.qm@web111214.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Heres next years Aeropac launch schedule copied from the Aeropac list-serve. Note the potential for 6 research days. (hey, we listened!) Seth Wallace Greetings Aeropac Members, Below you will find the 2010 launch schedule. We are going to try a few things different in 2010, mainly the addition of research launch days during ARLISS which includes 2 night launches open for research. We also have the weekend before ARLISS as tentative DIY research days that are possibly available by prior arrangement with the equipment manager and the FAA liaison. MUDROC Thur: 6/17 Setup Fri: 6/18 Mudroc Research launch Sat: 6/19 Mudroc launch/ Night launch Sun: 6/20 Mudroc launch/ teardown Aeronaut Thur: 8/5 Setup Fri: 8/6 Aeronaut Research launch Sat 8/7 Aeronaut launch/ Night launch Sun 8/8 Aeronaut launch/ teardown ARLISS/XPRS Sat: 9/11 DIY Research (Tentative) Sun: 9/12 DIY Research (Tentative) Mon: 9/13 ? ARLISS + Research launch Tues: 9/14 ? ARLISS + Research launch and Night launch Wed: 9/15 ? ARLISS + Research launch Thur: 9/16 ? ARLISS + Research launch and Night launch ? finish setup for XPRS Fri: 9/17 ? XPRS certified motors launch Sat: 9/18 ? XPRS certified motors launch and Night launch Sun: 9/19 ? XPRS certified motors launch and teardown ________________________________ From: "Azinger, Fred" To: Scott Berfield ; "rockets at rocketsnw.com" Sent: Tue, September 22, 2009 1:08:50 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] XPRS XPRS needs to be further separated from BALLS and/or have more research days before more NW fliers will attend..... I can't see the point in attending XPRS with BALLS two weeks later. With the new research rules allowing commercial flights....XPRS will (slowly) turn in a NAR event. Just hope BALLS sticks to the K or better rule for commercial flights -- otherwise there won't be enough GSE. All IMHO.....thanks for the launch report....we don't see many any more.... FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 9:58 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] XPRS Well, I've had 3 hours of sleep now, so thought I would drop an XPRS note to the list. I won't try to be eloquent, just a few items of note. Weather: beautiful, sunny and a little hot (low 90s) with almost no wind except for a dusty blow on Saturday afternoon. Attendance: much lower than past years. I am worried about the event. We need more NW flyers to get down there next year. Flights: Friday - BiPolar Disorder II -- 2 stage, K550->J350, successful flight to 14,000 and some change - my first successful 2 stage flight. Friday - 5" Polecat Fatboy -- J250-SK, good flight to just under (estimated) 4,000 with a little nervousness on the late deployment and no damage Saturday - Frankenrocket on a K185 to about 9,000 (estimated). Well, let's just say that I learned what a 36" SkyAngle chute sounds like when it explodes on deployment at 390 MPH 500 feet above the playa. No apogee deployment. Get the shovel. Saturday - A windy flight of my shiny new Eagle Claw (Talon knockoff) on an L640-Dual Thrust. Banged off the pad and a nice sustained thrust to 8,800. Clean recovery except for the battering and sanding of my cool paint job as it got dragged until it filled with Playa. I think I may just clear coat the dirt and scratches as war wounds. Sunday - The big team project (Dave Randall, michael Dennis, Mike Wyvel and me) U4EA launched on an M1419, 2 K1100s, and 2 J### (I forget what they were). My first time thermite (boy was I nervous) lit all 5 on the pad and she flew to around 2,500 feet (Dave Randall has the exact data). A nail biter when the big drogue didn't inflate, then the main didn't open then finally one fo the three chutes opened and brought her down more gently than we had any right to expect. Recovered with almost no damage. Sunday - Competitor 4 (called Big Yellow Taxi) on a very cool new CTI motor - an L1410-SK. Took forever to light but shot up dead straight in perfect still air on a huge column of sparks. 12,555 Feet and a perfect recovery. Monday (Research Day) - U4EA flew again, this time on an N that Brad Wright and Mike Wyvel made using "purple Helmet" propellant and 2 K1100s. All three lit on the pad (thermite again) and she went to around 3,600 feet abd third time is the charm as all 3 chutes deployed beautifully. For all that there weren't that many folks there, there were still lots of cool flights including some truly scary failures. And one hilarious attempt to fly Astroboy. You had to be there, but it was a hoot. Great company, hot springs with pre-installed Burning Man stoners, the occasionaly burn barrel, andamazing stars -- a great week. If BALLs weather is as nice, you guys will have a kickass weekend. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Sat Oct 24 17:54:09 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 17:54:09 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Rob Lamb please contact me offlist Message-ID: <73B9A618868740DB9404F58EBD92E851@LaptopKrausert> Rob, Would you please contact me offlist? Cheers, Robert From Mfreptiles at aol.com Sat Oct 24 18:03:11 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:03:11 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] XPRS Message-ID: Wow, that's pretty amazing, six research days leading up to XPRS. And earlier in the month than BALLS to avoid the onset of fall weather. I might just give that some thought. Mike F. In a message dated 10/24/2009 4:27:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, sethwallace1 at rocketmail.com writes: Heres next years Aeropac launch schedule copied from the Aeropac list-serve. Note the potential for 6 research days. (hey, we listened!) Seth Wallace Greetings Aeropac Members, Below you will find the 2010 launch schedule. We are going to try a few things different in 2010, mainly the addition of research launch days during ARLISS which includes 2 night launches open for research. We also have the weekend before ARLISS as tentative DIY research days that are possibly available by prior arrangement with the equipment manager and the FAA liaison. MUDROC Thur: 6/17 Setup Fri: 6/18 Mudroc Research launch Sat: 6/19 Mudroc launch/ Night launch Sun: 6/20 Mudroc launch/ teardown Aeronaut Thur: 8/5 Setup Fri: 8/6 Aeronaut Research launch Sat 8/7 Aeronaut launch/ Night launch Sun 8/8 Aeronaut launch/ teardown ARLISS/XPRS Sat: 9/11 DIY Research (Tentative) Sun: 9/12 DIY Research (Tentative) Mon: 9/13 ? ARLISS + Research launch Tues: 9/14 ? ARLISS + Research launch and Night launch Wed: 9/15 ? ARLISS + Research launch Thur: 9/16 ? ARLISS + Research launch and Night launch ? finish setup for XPRS Fri: 9/17 ? XPRS certified motors launch Sat: 9/18 ? XPRS certified motors launch and Night launch Sun: 9/19 ? XPRS certified motors launch and teardown ________________________________ From: "Azinger, Fred" To: Scott Berfield ; "rockets at rocketsnw.com" Sent: Tue, September 22, 2009 1:08:50 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] XPRS XPRS needs to be further separated from BALLS and/or have more research days before more NW fliers will attend..... I can't see the point in attending XPRS with BALLS two weeks later. With the new research rules allowing commercial flights....XPRS will (slowly) turn in a NAR event. Just hope BALLS sticks to the K or better rule for commercial flights -- otherwise there won't be enough GSE. All IMHO.....thanks for the launch report....we don't see many any more.... FredA -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 9:58 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] XPRS Well, I've had 3 hours of sleep now, so thought I would drop an XPRS note to the list. I won't try to be eloquent, just a few items of note. Weather: beautiful, sunny and a little hot (low 90s) with almost no wind except for a dusty blow on Saturday afternoon. Attendance: much lower than past years. I am worried about the event. We need more NW flyers to get down there next year. Flights: Friday - BiPolar Disorder II -- 2 stage, K550->J350, successful flight to 14,000 and some change - my first successful 2 stage flight. Friday - 5" Polecat Fatboy -- J250-SK, good flight to just under (estimated) 4,000 with a little nervousness on the late deployment and no damage Saturday - Frankenrocket on a K185 to about 9,000 (estimated). Well, let's just say that I learned what a 36" SkyAngle chute sounds like when it explodes on deployment at 390 MPH 500 feet above the playa. No apogee deployment. Get the shovel. Saturday - A windy flight of my shiny new Eagle Claw (Talon knockoff) on an L640-Dual Thrust. Banged off the pad and a nice sustained thrust to 8,800. Clean recovery except for the battering and sanding of my cool paint job as it got dragged until it filled with Playa. I think I may just clear coat the dirt and scratches as war wounds. Sunday - The big team project (Dave Randall, michael Dennis, Mike Wyvel and me) U4EA launched on an M1419, 2 K1100s, and 2 J### (I forget what they were). My first time thermite (boy was I nervous) lit all 5 on the pad and she flew to around 2,500 feet (Dave Randall has the exact data). A nail biter when the big drogue didn't inflate, then the main didn't open then finally one fo the three chutes opened and brought her down more gently than we had any right to expect. Recovered with almost no damage. Sunday - Competitor 4 (called Big Yellow Taxi) on a very cool new CTI motor - an L1410-SK. Took forever to light but shot up dead straight in perfect still air on a huge column of sparks. 12,555 Feet and a perfect recovery. Monday (Research Day) - U4EA flew again, this time on an N that Brad Wright and Mike Wyvel made using "purple Helmet" propellant and 2 K1100s. All three lit on the pad (thermite again) and she went to around 3,600 feet abd third time is the charm as all 3 chutes deployed beautifully. For all that there weren't that many folks there, there were still lots of cool flights including some truly scary failures. And one hilarious attempt to fly Astroboy. You had to be there, but it was a hoot. Great company, hot springs with pre-installed Burning Man stoners, the occasionaly burn barrel, andamazing stars -- a great week. If BALLs weather is as nice, you guys will have a kickass weekend. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From bigredbee at gmail.com Sat Oct 24 21:16:11 2009 From: bigredbee at gmail.com (Greg Clark) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:16:11 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: [ROCKETS] Punk Rocket Science's X-15 for Plaster Blaster In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Check this out! ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: SpartaChris Date: Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 7:29 PM Subject: [ROCKETS] Punk Rocket Science's X-15 for Plaster Blaster To: rockets at googlegroups.com It's gonna fly on the Saturday of Plaster Blaster on a pair of M2505's. Then maybe a pair of O's or P's at LDRS or Balls: http://s596.photobucket.com/albums/tt41/prsx15/?action=view¤t=IMG_5236.jpg http://s596.photobucket.com/albums/tt41/prsx15/?action=view¤t=IMG_5237.jpg http://s596.photobucket.com/albums/tt41/prsx15/?action=view¤t=IMG_5235.jpg http://s596.photobucket.com/albums/tt41/prsx15/?action=view¤t=IMG_5231.jpg -- -Chris TRA # 10762 L3 12" Talon on a P build: ROL: http://www.rocketryonline.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=950 TRF: http://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?t=3797 Special thanks to our sponsors! Ecology Auto Parts- www.ecoparts.com Trading Addicts- www.tradingaddicts.com Stickershock- www.stickershock23.com Interested in being a sponsor? Contact me direct! --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rockets" group. To post to this group, send email to rockets at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rockets+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rockets?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Sat Oct 24 21:42:26 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:42:26 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: [ROCKETS] Punk Rocket Science's X-15 for PlasterBlaster References: Message-ID: <3DD3AD4E3AD44E38B341EBA8C4E75889@LaptopKrausert> If the two 98's are close center, maybe as long as a single M will lift it. If the motors are cantered then I'd so no as an FSO. All safety aside, that is sweet looking. But will it be safe if one of the two M's fails to light. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Clark" To: Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2009 9:16 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: [ROCKETS] Punk Rocket Science's X-15 for PlasterBlaster > Check this out! > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: SpartaChris > Date: Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 7:29 PM > Subject: [ROCKETS] Punk Rocket Science's X-15 for Plaster Blaster > To: rockets at googlegroups.com > > > > It's gonna fly on the Saturday of Plaster Blaster on a pair of > M2505's. Then maybe a pair of O's or P's at LDRS or Balls: > > http://s596.photobucket.com/albums/tt41/prsx15/?action=view¤t=IMG_5236.jpg > > http://s596.photobucket.com/albums/tt41/prsx15/?action=view¤t=IMG_5237.jpg > > http://s596.photobucket.com/albums/tt41/prsx15/?action=view¤t=IMG_5235.jpg > > http://s596.photobucket.com/albums/tt41/prsx15/?action=view¤t=IMG_5231.jpg > > -- > -Chris > TRA # 10762 L3 > > 12" Talon on a P build: > > ROL: > http://www.rocketryonline.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=950 > > TRF: http://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?t=3797 > > > Special thanks to our sponsors! > > Ecology Auto Parts- www.ecoparts.com > > Trading Addicts- www.tradingaddicts.com > > Stickershock- www.stickershock23.com > > Interested in being a sponsor? Contact me direct! > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "rockets" group. > To post to this group, send email to rockets at googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rockets+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rockets?hl=en > -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From krislhull at comcast.net Sun Oct 25 00:50:13 2009 From: krislhull at comcast.net (Kristopher Hull) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 00:50:13 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Can anyone ID this rocket stage? (semi OT) In-Reply-To: <3DD3AD4E3AD44E38B341EBA8C4E75889@LaptopKrausert> References: <3DD3AD4E3AD44E38B341EBA8C4E75889@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: <000001ca5547$c976b740$5c6425c0$@net> I am going through a bunch of old photos from a few years ago and I found my stash from my trip to the Thiokol rocket park in 2005. I took photos of the info signs on most of the rockets, but I have a photo of one that did not have a sign. Any ideas? I am thinking that it might be a Minuteman stage, as the nozzle configuration is correct, but I am not too sure... Here is a link to the photo http://www.flickr.com/photos/krislhull/4038687848/ Kris "Never enough epoxy" Hull From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Sun Oct 25 08:05:41 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 08:05:41 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November In-Reply-To: <6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com> References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net> <5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox> <6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4AE46945.6000902@earthlink.net> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't be able to do so at that time, too. Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near Carnation. I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field between Monroe and Snohomish. Until then no rocketry in Seattle. Robert Dave Randall wrote: > My suggestion: > > Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) > > Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! > > dave > > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ wrote: > >> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the county >> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a launch so >> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >> >> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I can >> keep them informed. >> >> Thanks! >> >> George >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >> >> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> >> >> >>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your rockets >>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third Sunday (8th >>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a call to the >>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>> >>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>> >>> Robert >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> > > > > From Dunkman2000 at comcast.net Sun Oct 25 09:04:02 2009 From: Dunkman2000 at comcast.net (Mark Dunkle) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 09:04:02 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Cti cert 3 special on Giant leap Message-ID: On the Giant Leap website there is a special of buy the case and hardware and get the reload free. You pay for hazmat. Severval different options. Mark From pmschurke at seattleschools.org Sun Oct 25 15:11:10 2009 From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org (Schurke, Peter) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 15:11:10 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net> <5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox><6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com> <4AE46945.6000902@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B300308@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> So... If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be allowed. Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED we can still use the field... Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St. Seattle, WA 98133 ________________________________ From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM To: NW Rocketry mailing list Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't be able to do so at that time, too. Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near Carnation. I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field between Monroe and Snohomish. Until then no rocketry in Seattle. Robert Dave Randall wrote: > My suggestion: > > Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) > > Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! > > dave > > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ wrote: > >> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the county >> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a launch so >> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >> >> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I can >> keep them informed. >> >> Thanks! >> >> George >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >> >> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> >> >> >>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your rockets >>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third Sunday (8th >>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a call to the >>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>> >>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>> >>> Robert >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> > > > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From gbhchrist at verizon.net Sun Oct 25 16:14:34 2009 From: gbhchrist at verizon.net (George Christ) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 16:14:34 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November In-Reply-To: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B300308@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net><5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox><6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com><4AE46945.6000902@earthlink.net> <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B300308@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> Message-ID: <99FF820DB9D84D2DB61F17CB68E3CDDF@LittleGoodBox> Agreed. I, for one, have no intention of ceasing to help out Scouts working on the Space Exploration merit badge and other small-scale uses of 60 Acres for rocketry purposes. Peter, you and your TARC teams should also "fly on!" Despite the deals between King County Parks and LWYSA, 60 Acres is still a public park, paid for with Forward Thrust funds, and open to all. George ----- Original Message ----- From: "Schurke, Peter" To: "Hammer" ; "NW Rocketry mailing list" Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 3:11 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November > So... > > If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be allowed. > Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED we can > still use the field... > > Peter Schurke > Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor > Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy > Ingraham High School > 1819 N 135th St. > Seattle, WA 98133 > > ________________________________ > > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer > Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM > To: NW Rocketry mailing list > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November > > > > I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on > 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. > > After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since > the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring > rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on > everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't > be able to do so at that time, too. > > Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near > Carnation. > > I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field > between Monroe and Snohomish. > > Until then no rocketry in Seattle. > > Robert > > > > Dave Randall wrote: >> My suggestion: >> >> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >> >> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >> >> dave >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >> wrote: >> >>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the county >>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a launch >>> so >>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>> >>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I >>> can >>> keep them informed. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> George >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>> >>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>> >>> >>> >>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>> rockets >>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third Sunday >>>> (8th >>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a call >>>> to the >>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>> >>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>> >>>> Robert >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From sb at berfield.com Sun Oct 25 16:16:17 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:16:17 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: [ROCKETS] Punk Rocket Science's X-15 for Plaster Blaster Message-ID: Nice piece of work. I wonder what the weight is. nd I hope they both light. -----Original Message----- From: Greg Clark [mailto:bigredbee at gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2009 09:16 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Fwd: [ROCKETS] Punk Rocket Science's X-15 for Plaster Blaster Check this out! ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: SpartaChris Date: Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 7:29 PM Subject: [ROCKETS] Punk Rocket Science's X-15 for Plaster Blaster To: rockets at googlegroups.com It's gonna fly on the Saturday of Plaster Blaster on a pair of M2505's. Then maybe a pair of O's or P's at LDRS or Balls: http://s596.photobucket.com/albums/tt41/prsx15/?action=view?t=IMG_5236.jpg http://s596.photobucket.com/albums/tt41/prsx15/?action=view?t=IMG_5237.jpg http://s596.photobucket.com/albums/tt41/prsx15/?action=view?t=IMG_5235.jpg http://s596.photobucket.com/albums/tt41/prsx15/?action=view?t=IMG_5231.jpg -- -Chris TRA # 10762 L3 12" Talon on a P build: ROL: http://www.rocketryonline.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=950 TRF: http://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?t=3797 Special thanks to our sponsors! Ecology Auto Parts- www.ecoparts.com Trading Addicts- www.tradingaddicts.com Stickershock- www.stickershock23.com Interested in being a sponsor? Contact me direct! --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rockets" group. To post to this group, send email to rockets at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rockets+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rockets?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Sun Oct 25 16:40:16 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 16:40:16 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net><5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox><6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com><4AE46945.6000902@earthlink.net><844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B300308@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> <99FF820DB9D84D2DB61F17CB68E3CDDF@LittleGoodBox> Message-ID: <97A36AC359BA4A798B00FF91BCE80357@LaptopKrausert> Hammer, I'm not one to raise a fuss or rattle cages. I wish you the best with 60A site. But I wonder if the time has come to file a lawsuit against the park district their blated and repeated denial of use. I saw those pictures of the launch with police there enjoying the show. Grass recovery ends in less than a month. The rest of the time, the roots are not growing. So trampling on the grass in the winter makes no difference. As long as they fertilized in the Fall the root system will germinate and grow fine when Spring temps increase and longer day light days. George makes a great point. Show up, fly, and see if any one dares to kick you out. 60A was a mess for you all for years, then it seemed like you had a breakthrough this past year. Someone in the parks committee was sheltered from rockets as a child and you're paying. Soccer is allowed, but you can easily break a bone playing that game. Rocketry is safe if people follow the rules. And that's the whole point of your sanctioned events. Even if it's a no-host event. It's amaizing how people will advise and correct othes. You might want to consider filing a case against them. Just a few things to think about. Wish the best. I say fly anyway. Cheers, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Christ" To: "Schurke, Peter" ; "Hammer" ; "NW Rocketry mailing list" Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November > Agreed. I, for one, have no intention of ceasing to help out Scouts > working on the Space Exploration merit badge and other small-scale uses of > 60 Acres for rocketry purposes. Peter, you and your TARC teams should also > "fly on!" > > Despite the deals between King County Parks and LWYSA, 60 Acres is still a > public park, paid for with Forward Thrust funds, and open to all. > > George > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Schurke, Peter" > To: "Hammer" ; "NW Rocketry mailing > list" > Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 3:11 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November > > >> So... >> >> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be allowed. >> Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED we >> can still use the field... >> >> Peter Schurke >> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >> Ingraham High School >> 1819 N 135th St. >> Seattle, WA 98133 >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer >> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> >> >> >> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on >> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. >> >> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since >> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring >> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on >> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't >> be able to do so at that time, too. >> >> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near >> Carnation. >> >> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field >> between Monroe and Snohomish. >> >> Until then no rocketry in Seattle. >> >> Robert >> >> >> >> Dave Randall wrote: >>> My suggestion: >>> >>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >>> >>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >>> >>> dave >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>> wrote: >>> >>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the county >>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a >>>> launch so >>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>>> >>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I >>>> can >>>> keep them informed. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> George >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>>> >>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>>> rockets >>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third Sunday >>>>> (8th >>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a call >>>>> to the >>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>>> >>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>>> >>>>> Robert >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From pmschurke at seattleschools.org Sun Oct 25 17:28:42 2009 From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org (Schurke, Peter) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 17:28:42 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Big News and Mansfield Flight Report References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net><5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox><6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com><4AE46945.6000902@earthlink.net><844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B300308@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> <99FF820DB9D84D2DB61F17CB68E3CDDF@LittleGoodBox> <97A36AC359BA4A798B00FF91BCE80357@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B30030B@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> Alright time to brag for a moment... Thursday afternoon we got news from NASA that Ingraham High School's proposal to participate in the 2010 Student Launch Initiative has been accepted. We're guv'munt contractors now. Sorry for taking so long to get my brag on, but riding herd on a gaggle of teenagers prepping up for the last launch of the year at Mansfield has taken up most of my time until this afternoon. On to the Launch Report: Great launch weekend! Weather on Saturday was fantastic! Mostly clear skies all day and little wind to mess things up! Arrived at the Sportsmen's Club at around 8:30 am Saturday and started making camp. One of my students successfully completed her L2 flight. She took all of seven hours to get her rocket ready (can you say paranoid???) while triple and quadruple-checking every system, but in the end it flew and she got her cert. One of my alumni's L2 flight started beautifully--then ended badly. His apogee charge didn't fire and the main came out at 800 feet while the rocket was travelling ballistically at "ludicrous speed". 15" zipper through the fiberglassed airframe and the recovery harness snapped off a fin as it violently jerked the rocket around during main deploy. Sigh. My one flight of the weekend (LOC Vulcanite modified for dual deploy and reinforced with tip-to-tip glassed fins flying on a J500G) had a breathtaking boost followed by an "interesting" recovery: the recovery harness between fin can and ebay snapped. I had about three moments during the previous week that I looked at the stupid thing thought "that looks weak" and pondered replacing it, but then got sidetracked by something trivial--like teaching my students. Come launch day, I conned myself into believing that it would hold..."Go fever" bites another one in the butt! Anyway, got both halves back in excellent condition and it will be back to fly another day. Another flying season draws to a close and a very busy winter of design, fabrication, and construction awaits... Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St. Seattle, WA 98133 From sb at berfield.com Sun Oct 25 17:57:28 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:57:28 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? Message-ID: This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would be welcome. I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the case. If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see what the altimeter says for its performance each way. From pmschurke at seattleschools.org Sun Oct 25 19:50:49 2009 From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org (Schurke, Peter) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? References: Message-ID: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B30030D@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> Have you been watching MythBusters? For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the car with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test (2" deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were identical... The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a smooth surface. Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St. Seattle, WA 98133 ________________________________ From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would be welcome. I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the case. If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see what the altimeter says for its performance each way. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Sun Oct 25 20:18:39 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:18:39 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? In-Reply-To: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B30030D@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> References: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B30030D@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> Message-ID: <4AE5150F.7050003@earthlink.net> SkinzWraps: Shark Skin Improves Mileage http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/02/11/skinzwraps-shark-skin-improves-mileage/ Fastskinz (formerly Sharkskinz) Golf Ball Car Covering Gets Independent Testing http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/05/19/fastskinz-formerly-sharkskinz-golf-ball-car-covering-gets-independent-testing/ Fastskinz Test Drive: Can a Golf Ball Covering Improve MPGs? http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4316702.html http://www.fastskinz.com/ Buy some Fastskinz and put some on yer rocket to see if you notice a difference. Robert Schurke, Peter wrote: > Have you been watching MythBusters? > > For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". > > Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the car with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test (2" deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were identical... > > The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a smooth surface. > > Peter Schurke > Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor > Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy > Ingraham High School > 1819 N 135th St. > Seattle, WA 98133 > > ________________________________ > > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield > Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? > > > > This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? > > The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would be welcome. > > I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the case. > > If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see what the altimeter says for its performance each way. > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > From appusher at q.com Sun Oct 25 20:19:33 2009 From: appusher at q.com (Bill Munds) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 03:19:33 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? In-Reply-To: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B30030D@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> References: Message-ID: Peter, Being a non-TV-reception-household, I didn't see the episode. Question thou,.....what kind of car was it? I think maybe why the car got better mileage with the 2" of clay is more a weight/mass issue than the "dimple effect". Basketball/bowling ball distance contest. Why a dirty car would get "better mileage" is questionable. Why would the aircraftmanufacturers even buff out the edges of the logo paint if it didn't make a HUGE difference in performance? Bill EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD Join me > Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 > From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org > To: sb at berfield.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? > > Have you been watching MythBusters? > > For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". > > Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the car with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test (2" deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were identical... > > The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a smooth surface. > > Peter Schurke > Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor > Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy > Ingraham High School > 1819 N 135th St. > Seattle, WA 98133 > > ________________________________ > > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield > Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? > > > > This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? > > The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would be welcome. > > I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the case. > > If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see what the altimeter says for its performance each way. > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Sun Oct 25 20:21:10 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:21:10 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4AE515A6.4070806@earthlink.net> I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds. Robert Scott Berfield wrote: > This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? > > The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would be welcome. > > I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the case. > > If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see what the altimeter says for its performance each way. > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > From davewalp at comcast.net Sun Oct 25 20:34:02 2009 From: davewalp at comcast.net (David Walp) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:34:02 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative Message-ID: <001801ca55ed$2a390330$7eab0990$@net> Hi, If you were at Mansfield Saturday, you may have seen the spectacular end of my son's Mad Cow Mozzie - we learned the hard way it is best if motor burns just through the nozzle and not both ends at the same time. My son has a soft spot for the Mozzie, so we are considering building another but thinking of doing some upgrades... :-) The fins for the Mozzie are large and proportionally really hang out there. The fins that come with the kit are made of 1/8th inch plywood and were warped in our original kit (yes I straightened them with limited success). I suspect if we get our hands on another kit, the fins are likely to be warped given the kit has been discontinued and likely been sitting around. Our thought is to cut new fins from another material. We think there would be several issues with thicker plywood, more weight, CG moving more aft and having to enlarge the size of the pre-sloted openings - came immediately to us. A better grade 1/8th inch plywood wood be one choice. Based on the chatter on this discussion group, we were also thinking of trying G10? We have not yet used G10. The Mozzie is only a mid power rocket, would G10 be over kill? Any other suggestions for material? Thanks, _dave_ From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Sun Oct 25 20:47:45 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:47:45 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November In-Reply-To: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B300308@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net> <5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox><6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com> <4AE46945.6000902@earthlink.net> <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B300308@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> Message-ID: <4AE51BE1.1010900@earthlink.net> He specifically said they weren't going to allow any "organized activities" on 60 Acres until spring time. The launches we've had so far have had no real host or sponsoring club and is an informal get together of rocketeers. So...yeah, it's definitely a disorganized bunch. Robert Schurke, Peter wrote: > So... > > If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be allowed. Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED we can still use the field... > > Peter Schurke > Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor > Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy > Ingraham High School > 1819 N 135th St. > Seattle, WA 98133 > > ________________________________ > > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer > Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM > To: NW Rocketry mailing list > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November > > > > I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on > 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. > > After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since > the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring > rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on > everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't > be able to do so at that time, too. > > Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near > Carnation. > > I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field > between Monroe and Snohomish. > > Until then no rocketry in Seattle. > > Robert > > > > Dave Randall wrote: > >> My suggestion: >> >> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >> >> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >> >> dave >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ wrote: >> >> >>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the county >>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a launch so >>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>> >>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I can >>> keep them informed. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> George >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>> >>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your rockets >>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third Sunday (8th >>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a call to the >>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>> >>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>> >>>> Robert >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > From MartyWeiser at comcast.net Sun Oct 25 20:50:26 2009 From: MartyWeiser at comcast.net (Marty Weiser) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:50:26 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative In-Reply-To: <001801ca55ed$2a390330$7eab0990$@net> References: <001801ca55ed$2a390330$7eab0990$@net> Message-ID: <017f01ca55ef$747f6090$5d7e21b0$@net> Dave, A better grade of plywood is probably your best bet. Finnish birch is one of the better grades out there and Mike Fisher of Binder Design said he has found it to be better in his kits. G10 is denser than plywood and much more difficult to work. It is also probably overkill for more mid-power rockets. It is probably overkill for a lot of high power rockets as well. If you want a lighter weight fin you can laminate very thin plywood or G10 to foam core. Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of David Walp Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 8:34 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative Hi, If you were at Mansfield Saturday, you may have seen the spectacular end of my son's Mad Cow Mozzie - we learned the hard way it is best if motor burns just through the nozzle and not both ends at the same time. My son has a soft spot for the Mozzie, so we are considering building another but thinking of doing some upgrades... :-) The fins for the Mozzie are large and proportionally really hang out there. The fins that come with the kit are made of 1/8th inch plywood and were warped in our original kit (yes I straightened them with limited success). I suspect if we get our hands on another kit, the fins are likely to be warped given the kit has been discontinued and likely been sitting around. Our thought is to cut new fins from another material. We think there would be several issues with thicker plywood, more weight, CG moving more aft and having to enlarge the size of the pre-sloted openings - came immediately to us. A better grade 1/8th inch plywood wood be one choice. Based on the chatter on this discussion group, we were also thinking of trying G10? We have not yet used G10. The Mozzie is only a mid power rocket, would G10 be over kill? Any other suggestions for material? Thanks, _dave_ _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Sun Oct 25 21:17:44 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 21:17:44 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November In-Reply-To: <99FF820DB9D84D2DB61F17CB68E3CDDF@LittleGoodBox> References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net><5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox><6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com><4AE46945.6000902@earthlink.net> <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B300308@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> <99FF820DB9D84D2DB61F17CB68E3CDDF@LittleGoodBox> Message-ID: <4AE522E8.2000008@earthlink.net> Is it still a public park if the county handed over the keys to the LWYSA? Is it still funded by the tax payers or by money from the LWYSA? I happened to drive by there today and saw the dirt work they've done so far. I'm sure that came out of the LWYSA's pocket. robert George Christ wrote: > Agreed. I, for one, have no intention of ceasing to help out Scouts > working on the Space Exploration merit badge and other small-scale > uses of 60 Acres for rocketry purposes. Peter, you and your TARC teams > should also "fly on!" > > Despite the deals between King County Parks and LWYSA, 60 Acres is > still a public park, paid for with Forward Thrust funds, and open to all. > > George > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Schurke, Peter" > > To: "Hammer" ; "NW Rocketry mailing > list" > Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 3:11 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November > > >> So... >> >> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be >> allowed. Which, by extension means that if we're really, really >> DISORGANIZED we can still use the field... >> >> Peter Schurke >> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >> Ingraham High School >> 1819 N 135th St. >> Seattle, WA 98133 >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer >> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> >> >> >> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on >> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. >> >> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since >> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring >> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on >> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't >> be able to do so at that time, too. >> >> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near >> Carnation. >> >> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field >> between Monroe and Snohomish. >> >> Until then no rocketry in Seattle. >> >> Robert >> >> >> >> Dave Randall wrote: >>> My suggestion: >>> >>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >>> >>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >>> >>> dave >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>> wrote: >>> >>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the >>>> county >>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a >>>> launch so >>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>>> >>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so >>>> I can >>>> keep them informed. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> George >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>>> >>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>>> rockets >>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third >>>>> Sunday (8th >>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a >>>>> call to the >>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>>> >>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>>> >>>>> Robert >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > From jhadv at pacifier.com Sun Oct 25 21:47:20 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (jhadv at pacifier.com) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 21:47:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Dimples In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3022.76.115.45.22.1256532440.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> "I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds." That is my understanding as well and when I quit I was a 6 handicap. Taking spin is also another characteristic of a dimpled design that might not be ideal for this application. From what I have looked at the best thing that can be done for the performance of our rockets (besides the fineness ratio) would be the incorporation of near mach nose cones. The best analogy is not the SR-71 or a sounding rocket but the nose of a fighter plane. A vehicle that spends most of its time between .6 and 1.6 Mach and that passes the barrier in both directions very efficiently. Unless of course you're Mike Fisher in which case you might need more complex designs depending on the precise application but the problem there is that for the finer shapes (Von Karmen for example) the fidelity of the actual nosecone to the design parameters is a large problem. Close does not work. As in at all. May even hurt. > Send Rockets mailing list submissions to > rockets at rocketsnw.com > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > rockets-request at rocketsnw.com > > You can reach the person managing the list at > rockets-owner at rocketsnw.com > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Rockets digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. dimples? (Scott Berfield) > 2. Re: dimples? (Schurke, Peter) > 3. Re: dimples? (Hammer) > 4. Re: dimples? (Bill Munds) > 5. Re: dimples? (Hammer) > 6. 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative (David Walp) > 7. Re: The next 60 Acres launch in November (Hammer) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:57:28 +0000 > From: "Scott Berfield" > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I had > thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has anyone > done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved through > the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? > > The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear > indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on > more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would be > welcome. > > I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in military > missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the > case. > > If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with > two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see > what the altimeter says for its performance each way. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 > From: "Schurke, Peter" > To: "Scott Berfield" , > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? > Message-ID: > <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B30030D at CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Have you been watching MythBusters? > > For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the guys > took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a clean one > because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". > > Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable > difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the car > with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, > they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test (2" > deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all > the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in the > back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were identical... > > The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a > smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a smooth > surface. > > Peter Schurke > Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor > Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy > Ingraham High School > 1819 N 135th St. > Seattle, WA 98133 > > ________________________________ > > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield > Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? > > > > This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I had > thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has anyone > done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved through > the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? > > The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear > indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on > more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would be > welcome. > > I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in military > missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the > case. > > If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with > two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see > what the altimeter says for its performance each way. > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:18:39 -0700 > From: Hammer > To: NW Rocketry mailing list > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? > Message-ID: <4AE5150F.7050003 at earthlink.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > SkinzWraps: Shark Skin Improves Mileage > http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/02/11/skinzwraps-shark-skin-improves-mileage/ > > Fastskinz (formerly Sharkskinz) Golf Ball Car Covering Gets Independent > Testing > http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/05/19/fastskinz-formerly-sharkskinz-golf-ball-car-covering-gets-independent-testing/ > > Fastskinz Test Drive: Can a Golf Ball Covering Improve MPGs? > http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4316702.html > > http://www.fastskinz.com/ > > Buy some Fastskinz and put some on yer rocket to see if you notice a > difference. > > Robert > > > Schurke, Peter wrote: >> Have you been watching MythBusters? >> >> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a >> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >> >> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the car >> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test (2" >> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were >> identical... >> >> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >> smooth surface. >> >> Peter Schurke >> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >> Ingraham High School >> 1819 N 135th St. >> Seattle, WA 98133 >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> >> >> >> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >> ball? >> >> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >> be welcome. >> >> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to >> be the case. >> >> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 03:19:33 +0000 > From: Bill Munds > To: Peter Schurke , scott berfield > , > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > Peter, > > Being a non-TV-reception-household, I didn't see the episode. > > Question thou,.....what kind of car was it? > > I think maybe why the car got better mileage with the 2" of clay is more a > weight/mass issue than the "dimple effect". Basketball/bowling ball > distance contest. > > Why a dirty car would get "better mileage" is questionable. Why would the > aircraftmanufacturers even buff out the edges of the logo paint if it > didn't make a HUGE difference in performance? > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD > Join me > > > >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 >> From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org >> To: sb at berfield.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> >> Have you been watching MythBusters? >> >> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a >> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >> >> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the car >> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test (2" >> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were >> identical... >> >> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >> smooth surface. >> >> Peter Schurke >> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >> Ingraham High School >> 1819 N 135th St. >> Seattle, WA 98133 >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> >> >> >> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >> ball? >> >> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >> be welcome. >> >> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to >> be the case. >> >> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:21:10 -0700 > From: Hammer > To: NW Rocketry mailing list > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? > Message-ID: <4AE515A6.4070806 at earthlink.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he > said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds. > > Robert > > Scott Berfield wrote: >> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >> ball? >> >> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >> be welcome. >> >> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to >> be the case. >> >> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:34:02 -0700 > From: "David Walp" > To: > Subject: [RocketsNW] 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative > Message-ID: <001801ca55ed$2a390330$7eab0990$@net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Hi, > > > > If you were at Mansfield Saturday, you may have seen the spectacular end > of > my son's Mad Cow Mozzie - we learned the hard way it is best if motor > burns > just through the nozzle and not both ends at the same time. My son has a > soft spot for the Mozzie, so we are considering building another but > thinking of doing some upgrades... :-) > > > > The fins for the Mozzie are large and proportionally really hang out > there. > The fins that come with the kit are made of 1/8th inch plywood and were > warped in our original kit (yes I straightened them with limited success). > I suspect if we get our hands on another kit, the fins are likely to be > warped given the kit has been discontinued and likely been sitting around. > Our thought is to cut new fins from another material. We think there > would > be several issues with thicker plywood, more weight, CG moving more aft > and > having to enlarge the size of the pre-sloted openings - came immediately > to > us. A better grade 1/8th inch plywood wood be one choice. Based on the > chatter on this discussion group, we were also thinking of trying G10? We > have not yet used G10. The Mozzie is only a mid power rocket, would G10 > be > over kill? Any other suggestions for material? > > > > Thanks, > > _dave_ > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:47:45 -0700 > From: Hammer > To: NW Rocketry mailing list > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November > Message-ID: <4AE51BE1.1010900 at earthlink.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > He specifically said they weren't going to allow any "organized > activities" on 60 Acres until spring time. The launches we've had so > far have had no real host or sponsoring club and is an informal get > together of rocketeers. So...yeah, it's definitely a disorganized bunch. > > > > Robert > > Schurke, Peter wrote: >> So... >> >> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be allowed. >> Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED we >> can still use the field... >> >> Peter Schurke >> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >> Ingraham High School >> 1819 N 135th St. >> Seattle, WA 98133 >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer >> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> >> >> >> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on >> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. >> >> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since >> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring >> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on >> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't >> be able to do so at that time, too. >> >> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near >> Carnation. >> >> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field >> between Monroe and Snohomish. >> >> Until then no rocketry in Seattle. >> >> Robert >> >> >> >> Dave Randall wrote: >> >>> My suggestion: >>> >>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >>> >>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >>> >>> dave >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the >>>> county >>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a >>>> launch so >>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>>> >>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I >>>> can >>>> keep them informed. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> George >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>>> >>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>>> rockets >>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third >>>>> Sunday (8th >>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a call >>>>> to the >>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>>> >>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>>> >>>>> Robert >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > End of Rockets Digest, Vol 21, Issue 99 > *************************************** > > From t.j.doll at att.net Sun Oct 25 21:55:56 2009 From: t.j.doll at att.net (t.j.doll at att.net) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 04:55:56 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? Message-ID: <102620090455.25893.4AE52BDC0007F8020000652522230680329B0A02D29B9B0EBF0404010BD206D29B@att.net> >Question thou,.....what kind of car was it? >I think maybe why the car got better mileage with the 2" of clay is more a >weight/mass issue than the "dimple effect". Basketball/bowling ball distance >contest. > >Why a dirty car would get "better mileage" is questionable. Why would the >aircraftmanufacturers even buff out the edges of the logo paint if it didn't >make a HUGE difference in performance? I'm not sure what kind of car it was - it might have been a Ford Taurus but I really wasn't paying attention to that. But the only part of the testing I could take issue with was that they didn't redo the 'control'. The took the car, added a layer of smooth clay, then did the mileage testing (one mile run at a steady 65 mph, repeated 5 times). I think they said the clay added 800 pounds - but with the clay was the baseline. They then added the 'dimples', took the removed clay and threw it in the back seat to keep the weight constant, then repeated the mileage testing. They got better than a 2 mpg improvement. I was skeptical they'd get a significant improvement - modern cars are, unlike a golf ball, designed to be aerodynamic - but the results are pretty hard to argue with. But as noted, there is a big difference between 65 mph and 600 mph...... One of the big issues in the Boeing transonic wind tunnel is getting turbulent flow on a (relatively) small model, since turbulent flow starts very quickly at near Mach speeds. Tim From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Sun Oct 25 22:11:13 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 22:11:13 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November In-Reply-To: <97A36AC359BA4A798B00FF91BCE80357@LaptopKrausert> References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net><5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox><6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com><4AE46945.6000902@earthlink.net><844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B300308@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> <99FF820DB9D84D2DB61F17CB68E3CDDF@LittleGoodBox> <97A36AC359BA4A798B00FF91BCE80357@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: <4AE52F71.1060405@earthlink.net> "In addition, various community groups, including the Boy Scouts, will be allowed to launch model rockets during the off-peak soccer months, Bateman said. And of course, any drop-in use is welcome when there are not large soccer tournaments, Bateman added." http://www.pnwlocalnews.com/east_king/kir/news/56738987.html I think we could be drop-in users and do this throughout the non-soccer season. If some one actually comes out and tells us to leave then we can get it documented and witnessed and take a complaint to the county. According to a schedule I have found on-line the last set of games to be played at 60 Acres is on 15NOV09. We could dis-organize a drop-in Turkey Shoot Launch for the following Sunday on 22NOV09. How many people are game for that date? robert King County Executive Tim Hill said it well, in August 23, 1988: "We do not believe it is King County's role as a public service provider to dedicate park land for the development of "premier" level facilities for one group while another interests of unserved, or served at disproportionately low levels. As its population grows, King County is coming under increasing pressure from taxpayers who have become more vocal in demanding an equitable share of facilities to accommodate their varied activities...These valuable resources must be shared by all County residents." "While soccer will be prominent at Sixty Acres Park, other non-soccer uses that have been staples at the park will continue. Members of the Seattle Area Soaring Society (SASS), which fought hard against the project, will rent the field on Wednesday evenings from June through September for their popular weekly Fun Fly event, where they fly remote-controlled sailplanes, according to Steven Allmaras, SASS president. In addition, various community groups, including the Boy Scouts, will be allowed to launch model rockets during the off-peak soccer months, Bateman said. And of course, any drop-in use is welcome when there are not large soccer tournaments, Bateman added." http://www.pnwlocalnews.com/east_king/kir/news/56738987.html According to the LWYSA, the number of youth served by them is actually decreasing. Their numbers show over 6400 members in 1998, a peak of 6916 in 2007, and 6543 in 2008 ? not much of a change over a 10 year period. http://www.teamirene.com/does-everything-have-to-be-a-soccer-field-60-acres-park-in-redmond-to-be-leased-to-lwysa/ 60 Acres South Construction News http://magellanarchitects.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/project-update-60-acres-south-soccer-fields/ http://redmondcity.blogspot.com/2009/10/lwysa-is-looking-for-community-service.html Robert Krausert wrote: > Hammer, > I'm not one to raise a fuss or rattle cages. I wish you the best with > 60A site. But I wonder if the time has come to file a lawsuit against > the park district their blated and repeated denial of use. I saw those > pictures of the launch with police there enjoying the show. Grass > recovery ends in less than a month. The rest of the time, the roots > are not growing. So trampling on the grass in the winter makes no > difference. As long as they fertilized in the Fall the root system > will germinate and grow fine when Spring temps increase and longer day > light days. George makes a great point. Show up, fly, and see if any > one dares to kick you out. 60A was a mess for you all for years, then > it seemed like you had a breakthrough this past year. Someone in the > parks committee was sheltered from rockets as a child and you're > paying. Soccer is allowed, but you can easily break a bone playing > that game. Rocketry is safe if people follow the rules. And that's the > whole point of your sanctioned events. Even if it's a no-host event. > It's amaizing how people will advise and correct othes. You might want > to consider filing a case against them. Just a few things to think about. > > Wish the best. I say fly anyway. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Christ" > > To: "Schurke, Peter" ; "Hammer" > ; "NW Rocketry mailing list" > > Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 4:14 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November > > >> Agreed. I, for one, have no intention of ceasing to help out Scouts >> working on the Space Exploration merit badge and other small-scale >> uses of 60 Acres for rocketry purposes. Peter, you and your TARC >> teams should also "fly on!" >> >> Despite the deals between King County Parks and LWYSA, 60 Acres is >> still a public park, paid for with Forward Thrust funds, and open to >> all. >> >> George >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Schurke, Peter" >> >> To: "Hammer" ; "NW Rocketry >> mailing list" >> Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 3:11 PM >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> >> >>> So... >>> >>> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be >>> allowed. Which, by extension means that if we're really, really >>> DISORGANIZED we can still use the field... >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM >>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>> >>> >>> >>> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on >>> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. >>> >>> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since >>> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring >>> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on >>> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't >>> be able to do so at that time, too. >>> >>> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near >>> Carnation. >>> >>> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field >>> between Monroe and Snohomish. >>> >>> Until then no rocketry in Seattle. >>> >>> Robert >>> >>> >>> >>> Dave Randall wrote: >>>> My suggestion: >>>> >>>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >>>> >>>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >>>> >>>> dave >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the >>>>> county >>>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a >>>>> launch so >>>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>>>> >>>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know >>>>> so I can >>>>> keep them informed. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> George >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>>>> >>>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>>>> rockets >>>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third >>>>>> Sunday (8th >>>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a >>>>>> call to the >>>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>>>> >>>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>>>> >>>>>> Robert >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Sun Oct 25 22:42:12 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 22:42:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November In-Reply-To: <97A36AC359BA4A798B00FF91BCE80357@LaptopKrausert> References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net><5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox><6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com><4AE46945.6000902@earthlink.net><844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B300308@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> <99FF820DB9D84D2DB61F17CB68E3CDDF@LittleGoodBox> <97A36AC359BA4A798B00FF91BCE80357@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: Yep, as a very small time hay farmer and seemingly professional cultivator of grass and pigweed in my vegetable garden... If they've scraped the field down to bare dirt and planted new seed then yes, it would be best to minimize use over the winter. But if the turf is rooted in, well heck, I've deliberately pulled out all the rhizomes I could find in my garden before winter and still had plenty of grass grow back by mid-spring. I gave up on trying to kill off the grass without resorting to chemicals. The main footpath here has been worn down to mud over a winter and returned to green turf by summer. No reason to shoo off a few rocketeers if the turf is rooted in! Turf type grass is designed not to die. +McG+ > Hammer, > I'm not one to raise a fuss or rattle cages. I wish you the best with 60A > site. But I wonder if the time has come to file a lawsuit against the park > district their blated and repeated denial of use. I saw those pictures of > the launch with police there enjoying the show. Grass recovery ends in > less > than a month. The rest of the time, the roots are not growing. So > trampling > on the grass in the winter makes no difference. As long as they fertilized > in the Fall the root system will germinate and grow fine when Spring temps > increase and longer day light days. George makes a great point. Show up, > fly, and see if any one dares to kick you out. 60A was a mess for you all > for years, then it seemed like you had a breakthrough this past year. > Someone in the parks committee was sheltered from rockets as a child and > you're paying. Soccer is allowed, but you can easily break a bone playing > that game. Rocketry is safe if people follow the rules. And that's the > whole > point of your sanctioned events. Even if it's a no-host event. It's > amaizing > how people will advise and correct othes. You might want to consider > filing > a case against them. Just a few things to think about. > > Wish the best. I say fly anyway. > > Cheers, > Robert > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "George Christ" > To: "Schurke, Peter" ; "Hammer" > ; "NW Rocketry mailing list" > > Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 4:14 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November > > >> Agreed. I, for one, have no intention of ceasing to help out Scouts >> working on the Space Exploration merit badge and other small-scale uses >> of >> 60 Acres for rocketry purposes. Peter, you and your TARC teams should >> also >> "fly on!" >> >> Despite the deals between King County Parks and LWYSA, 60 Acres is still >> a >> public park, paid for with Forward Thrust funds, and open to all. >> >> George >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Schurke, Peter" >> To: "Hammer" ; "NW Rocketry mailing >> list" >> Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 3:11 PM >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> >> >>> So... >>> >>> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be allowed. >>> Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED we >>> can still use the field... >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM >>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>> >>> >>> >>> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on >>> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. >>> >>> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since >>> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring >>> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on >>> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't >>> be able to do so at that time, too. >>> >>> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near >>> Carnation. >>> >>> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field >>> between Monroe and Snohomish. >>> >>> Until then no rocketry in Seattle. >>> >>> Robert >>> >>> >>> >>> Dave Randall wrote: >>>> My suggestion: >>>> >>>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >>>> >>>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >>>> >>>> dave >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the >>>>> county >>>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a >>>>> launch so >>>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>>>> >>>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I >>>>> can >>>>> keep them informed. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> George >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>>>> >>>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>>>> rockets >>>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third >>>>>> Sunday >>>>>> (8th >>>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a >>>>>> call >>>>>> to the >>>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>>>> >>>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>>>> >>>>>> Robert >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Sun Oct 25 23:10:55 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:10:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Dimples In-Reply-To: <3022.76.115.45.22.1256532440.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> References: <3022.76.115.45.22.1256532440.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> Message-ID: <382c6c1797a0f79c70d8e2e88b4f104b.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> The whole point of dimpling is to induce a consistent and uniform amount of turbulence. This increases the range of a golf ball and allows much more precise control of trajectory and spin. On rockets the closest trick is the use of a turbulence inducing ring near the top of the body tube to induce turbulent boundary layer flow before it happens erratically at a somewhat more aft point. The NAR competition guys used a single layer wrap of Scotch tape. In rockets using nose cone separation, this usually occurs naturally at the NC/BT junction anyway. Experiments have been done using suction through tiny holes on wing surfaces to maintain laminar flow on the surface. I've wondered if that could be done on rocket body tubes using the suction of base drag. It'd take a very smooth tube and a kazillion tiny holes though. +McG+ > "I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he > said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds." > > That is my understanding as well and when I quit I was a 6 handicap. > Taking spin is also another characteristic of a dimpled design that might > not be ideal for this application. From what I have looked at the best > thing that can be done for the performance of our rockets (besides the > fineness ratio) would be the incorporation of near mach nose cones. The > best analogy is not the SR-71 or a sounding rocket but the nose of a > fighter plane. A vehicle that spends most of its time between .6 and 1.6 > Mach and that passes the barrier in both directions very efficiently. > Unless of course you're Mike Fisher in which case you might need more > complex designs depending on the precise application but the problem there > is that for the finer shapes (Von Karmen for example) the fidelity of the > actual nosecone to the design parameters is a large problem. Close does > not work. As in at all. May even hurt. > > > > >> Send Rockets mailing list submissions to >> rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> rockets-request at rocketsnw.com >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> rockets-owner at rocketsnw.com >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of Rockets digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. dimples? (Scott Berfield) >> 2. Re: dimples? (Schurke, Peter) >> 3. Re: dimples? (Hammer) >> 4. Re: dimples? (Bill Munds) >> 5. Re: dimples? (Hammer) >> 6. 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative (David Walp) >> 7. Re: The next 60 Acres launch in November (Hammer) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:57:28 +0000 >> From: "Scott Berfield" >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >> had >> thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >> anyone >> done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >> through >> the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? >> >> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >> be >> welcome. >> >> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >> military >> missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the >> case. >> >> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 >> From: "Schurke, Peter" >> To: "Scott Berfield" , >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B30030D at CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> Have you been watching MythBusters? >> >> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >> guys >> took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a clean >> one >> because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >> >> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the car >> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test (2" >> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >> the >> back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were identical... >> >> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >> smooth >> surface. >> >> Peter Schurke >> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >> Ingraham High School >> 1819 N 135th St. >> Seattle, WA 98133 >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> >> >> >> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >> had >> thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >> anyone >> done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >> through >> the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? >> >> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >> be >> welcome. >> >> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >> military >> missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the >> case. >> >> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:18:39 -0700 >> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: <4AE5150F.7050003 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> SkinzWraps: Shark Skin Improves Mileage >> http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/02/11/skinzwraps-shark-skin-improves-mileage/ >> >> Fastskinz (formerly Sharkskinz) Golf Ball Car Covering Gets Independent >> Testing >> http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/05/19/fastskinz-formerly-sharkskinz-golf-ball-car-covering-gets-independent-testing/ >> >> Fastskinz Test Drive: Can a Golf Ball Covering Improve MPGs? >> http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4316702.html >> >> http://www.fastskinz.com/ >> >> Buy some Fastskinz and put some on yer rocket to see if you notice a >> difference. >> >> Robert >> >> >> Schurke, Peter wrote: >>> Have you been watching MythBusters? >>> >>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >>> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a >>> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >>> >>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the >>> car >>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test >>> (2" >>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >>> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were >>> identical... >>> >>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >>> smooth surface. >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> >>> >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>> improved >>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>> ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>> to >>> be the case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 03:19:33 +0000 >> From: Bill Munds >> To: Peter Schurke , scott berfield >> , >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> >> Peter, >> >> Being a non-TV-reception-household, I didn't see the episode. >> >> Question thou,.....what kind of car was it? >> >> I think maybe why the car got better mileage with the 2" of clay is more >> a >> weight/mass issue than the "dimple effect". Basketball/bowling ball >> distance contest. >> >> Why a dirty car would get "better mileage" is questionable. Why would >> the >> aircraftmanufacturers even buff out the edges of the logo paint if it >> didn't make a HUGE difference in performance? >> >> >> >> >> Bill >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD >> Join me >> >> >> >>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 >>> From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org >>> To: sb at berfield.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> Have you been watching MythBusters? >>> >>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >>> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a >>> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >>> >>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the >>> car >>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test >>> (2" >>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >>> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were >>> identical... >>> >>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >>> smooth surface. >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> >>> >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>> improved >>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>> ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>> to >>> be the case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:21:10 -0700 >> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: <4AE515A6.4070806 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he >> said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds. >> >> Robert >> >> Scott Berfield wrote: >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>> improved >>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>> ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>> to >>> be the case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:34:02 -0700 >> From: "David Walp" >> To: >> Subject: [RocketsNW] 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative >> Message-ID: <001801ca55ed$2a390330$7eab0990$@net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> If you were at Mansfield Saturday, you may have seen the spectacular end >> of >> my son's Mad Cow Mozzie - we learned the hard way it is best if motor >> burns >> just through the nozzle and not both ends at the same time. My son has >> a >> soft spot for the Mozzie, so we are considering building another but >> thinking of doing some upgrades... :-) >> >> >> >> The fins for the Mozzie are large and proportionally really hang out >> there. >> The fins that come with the kit are made of 1/8th inch plywood and were >> warped in our original kit (yes I straightened them with limited >> success). >> I suspect if we get our hands on another kit, the fins are likely to be >> warped given the kit has been discontinued and likely been sitting >> around. >> Our thought is to cut new fins from another material. We think there >> would >> be several issues with thicker plywood, more weight, CG moving more aft >> and >> having to enlarge the size of the pre-sloted openings - came immediately >> to >> us. A better grade 1/8th inch plywood wood be one choice. Based on the >> chatter on this discussion group, we were also thinking of trying G10? >> We >> have not yet used G10. The Mozzie is only a mid power rocket, would G10 >> be >> over kill? Any other suggestions for material? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> _dave_ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 7 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:47:45 -0700 >> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> Message-ID: <4AE51BE1.1010900 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> He specifically said they weren't going to allow any "organized >> activities" on 60 Acres until spring time. The launches we've had so >> far have had no real host or sponsoring club and is an informal get >> together of rocketeers. So...yeah, it's definitely a disorganized >> bunch. >> >> >> >> Robert >> >> Schurke, Peter wrote: >>> So... >>> >>> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be allowed. >>> Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED we >>> can still use the field... >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM >>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>> >>> >>> >>> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on >>> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. >>> >>> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since >>> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring >>> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on >>> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't >>> be able to do so at that time, too. >>> >>> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near >>> Carnation. >>> >>> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field >>> between Monroe and Snohomish. >>> >>> Until then no rocketry in Seattle. >>> >>> Robert >>> >>> >>> >>> Dave Randall wrote: >>> >>>> My suggestion: >>>> >>>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >>>> >>>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >>>> >>>> dave >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the >>>>> county >>>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a >>>>> launch so >>>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>>>> >>>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I >>>>> can >>>>> keep them informed. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> George >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>>>> >>>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>>>> rockets >>>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third >>>>>> Sunday (8th >>>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a >>>>>> call >>>>>> to the >>>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>>>> >>>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>>>> >>>>>> Robert >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> End of Rockets Digest, Vol 21, Issue 99 >> *************************************** >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From gbhchrist at verizon.net Mon Oct 26 00:01:03 2009 From: gbhchrist at verizon.net (George Christ) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:01:03 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November In-Reply-To: References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net><5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox><6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com><4AE46945.6000902@earthlink.net><844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B300308@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> <99FF820DB9D84D2DB61F17CB68E3CDDF@LittleGoodBox> <97A36AC359BA4A798B00FF91BCE80357@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: A quick (maybe not so quick...) clarification: 60 Acres Park is bisected by NE 116th Street. The portion north of the street has been long-term leased to LWYSA for many years, is graded for soccer fields, and has well-established turf grass. The portion on the south side of the street was until earlier this year strictly a passive-use area under the stewardship of the Seattle Area Soaring Society. In addition to their glider flights, the south portion of the park was used as a model rocket field, a dog park, an ultimate frisbee course, and occasionally as a hot-air balloon, as well as just plain undeveloped open space. LWYSA got a lease for this portion earlier this year and are in the process of grading it and seeding it for turfed soccer fields. Historically, LWYSA actively discouraged any non-soccer use of the north portion. During the off-season they had several large signs forbidding use; there are anecdotal reports that those who were noticed to be disregarding the signs were pointedly asked to leave. This changed a few years ago when they were ramping up their campaign to get King County to lease them the south portion as well and wanted to cultivate a more cooperative image. The signs came down and informal use was allowed when it did not conflict with soccer. Little by little, we've rebuilt the formerly very adversarial relationship between rocket hobbyists and soccer folk. From those informal beginnings, we've gotten to the point where we can pre-arrange more organized events. LWYSA has been very accommodating in allowing not only the launches Robert has arranged, but Peter's TARC team use of the field and the Scouting rocketry events I organize. Earlier this month we had over 150 Cubs flying there one Saturday afternoon after soccer had finished for the day on the fields we were using for the event. None of us are seeking to fly off of the newly graded-and-seeded south half until it is well-established. We just want to continue to use the north half as we have been in the last year or so when there is no soccer underway. I very much hope that the discouraging response Robert recently received is not a harbinger of a less cooperative LWYSA now that their lease is in place. I've very much enjoyed the improved relations and would not want to have to go back to butting heads with them. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Robert Krausert" Cc: "George Christ" ; "Schurke, Peter" ; "Hammer" ; "NW Rocketry mailing list" Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 10:42 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November > Yep, as a very small time hay farmer and seemingly professional cultivator > of grass and pigweed in my vegetable garden... > > If they've scraped the field down to bare dirt and planted new seed then > yes, it would be best to minimize use over the winter. But if the turf is > rooted in, well heck, I've deliberately pulled out all the rhizomes I > could find in my garden before winter and still had plenty of grass grow > back by mid-spring. I gave up on trying to kill off the grass without > resorting to chemicals. The main footpath here has been worn down to mud > over a winter and returned to green turf by summer. No reason to shoo off > a few rocketeers if the turf is rooted in! > > Turf type grass is designed not to die. > +McG+ > > >> Hammer, >> I'm not one to raise a fuss or rattle cages. I wish you the best with 60A >> site. But I wonder if the time has come to file a lawsuit against the >> park >> district their blated and repeated denial of use. I saw those pictures of >> the launch with police there enjoying the show. Grass recovery ends in >> less >> than a month. The rest of the time, the roots are not growing. So >> trampling >> on the grass in the winter makes no difference. As long as they >> fertilized >> in the Fall the root system will germinate and grow fine when Spring >> temps >> increase and longer day light days. George makes a great point. Show up, >> fly, and see if any one dares to kick you out. 60A was a mess for you all >> for years, then it seemed like you had a breakthrough this past year. >> Someone in the parks committee was sheltered from rockets as a child and >> you're paying. Soccer is allowed, but you can easily break a bone playing >> that game. Rocketry is safe if people follow the rules. And that's the >> whole >> point of your sanctioned events. Even if it's a no-host event. It's >> amaizing >> how people will advise and correct othes. You might want to consider >> filing >> a case against them. Just a few things to think about. >> >> Wish the best. I say fly anyway. >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "George Christ" >> To: "Schurke, Peter" ; "Hammer" >> ; "NW Rocketry mailing list" >> >> Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 4:14 PM >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> >> >>> Agreed. I, for one, have no intention of ceasing to help out Scouts >>> working on the Space Exploration merit badge and other small-scale uses >>> of >>> 60 Acres for rocketry purposes. Peter, you and your TARC teams should >>> also >>> "fly on!" >>> >>> Despite the deals between King County Parks and LWYSA, 60 Acres is still >>> a >>> public park, paid for with Forward Thrust funds, and open to all. >>> >>> George >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Schurke, Peter" >>> To: "Hammer" ; "NW Rocketry mailing >>> list" >>> Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 3:11 PM >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>> >>> >>>> So... >>>> >>>> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be allowed. >>>> Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED we >>>> can still use the field... >>>> >>>> Peter Schurke >>>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>>> Ingraham High School >>>> 1819 N 135th St. >>>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> >>>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer >>>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM >>>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >>>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on >>>> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. >>>> >>>> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since >>>> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring >>>> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on >>>> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't >>>> be able to do so at that time, too. >>>> >>>> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near >>>> Carnation. >>>> >>>> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field >>>> between Monroe and Snohomish. >>>> >>>> Until then no rocketry in Seattle. >>>> >>>> Robert >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Dave Randall wrote: >>>>> My suggestion: >>>>> >>>>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >>>>> >>>>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >>>>> >>>>> dave >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the >>>>>> county >>>>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a >>>>>> launch so >>>>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>>>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>>>>> >>>>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I >>>>>> can >>>>>> keep them informed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>> >>>>>> George >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>>>>> >>>>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>>>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>>>>> rockets >>>>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third >>>>>>> Sunday >>>>>>> (8th >>>>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a >>>>>>> call >>>>>>> to the >>>>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Robert >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > > From bigrockets at verizon.net Mon Oct 26 02:04:55 2009 From: bigrockets at verizon.net (Dave Proffitt) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 02:04:55 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Dimples In-Reply-To: <382c6c1797a0f79c70d8e2e88b4f104b.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> References: <3022.76.115.45.22.1256532440.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> <382c6c1797a0f79c70d8e2e88b4f104b.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Message-ID: <000601ca561b$638840a0$2a98c1e0$@net> I think your speaking of boundary layer control Ken? One aircraft in particular, a jet, can't remember the model but it employed boundary layer control and it worked pretty good. The biggest problem with it was there were so many small holes and they kept getting plugged up with dirt. I guess it was a real maintenance nightmare so they gave it up as a bad job. As far as dimpling bullets go, I think we're getting into the realm of Reynolds numbers VS bullet drag here. I've done lots of target shooting. Mostly .30 caliber stuff. The .30 caliber match bullets have some very good sectional density and ballistic coefficients. The 220 grain Sierra Matchking hollow point boat tail seems to me to have a BC of .746 above 2800 fps. Part of this is due the sectional density of a 220 bullet and the rest of it with the velocity. Bullets seem to have a sweet spot they like to operate in for a given design. My .338-.378 will shoot a 300 grain Matchking at its optimal velocity and has a BC of almost.800. Good target bullets are a model of streamlining and aerodynamics. Most don't bleed velocity or energy until they get out past 300 yards or so. It's a wonderment to me that they even stay together at the rotational speed they fly at. The V2 reminds me of a bullet with fins. It has a spire point and a boat tail, just doesn't rotate as fast as a bullet does. As far as the Myth Busters show with the clay on the car, I have a real hard time believeing they put on 800 lbs of it? I missed that part of the show that told how much they put on but it looked like there was only about a 4 inch layer of clay on it. I don't know maybe that much clay would weigh 800 lbs? The car didn't squat much like it had that much extra weight on it however. I'm really surprised it had any affect on mileage at all. Drag increases with the square of velocity if I remember things right, so a car at 60 mph is not generating anywhere near the amount of drag a jet would at 600 mph. There was a deal on muscle cars back in the 60's. Pontiac made a big deal out of it with the GTO, and they even named the motor after it. They called it a Ram air IV. In drag racing, it's not really effective on cars that run just a little over 100 mph. The ram effect doesn't really do much until the car gets into the 100 mph realm. Most super gas cars do good to get 145-150 mph in the quarter much less a 4000 lb Goat that runs 98 mph or maybe 105 mph. There's much more power to be had using a cold air intake than messing around with ram air. I'm off the subject now. Gee how did I manage that? Not hard for me. I found a place in Boring that does graphics work. I have not talked to the owner yet, seems like every time I stop by he's gone somewhere. Last time was close to lunch. I'm gonna ask him if he would do some graphics on one of my rockets, before I clear coat it. How about a Velociraptor on a Velociraptor Brad? Just thinking out loud. Dave Proffitt -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 11:11 PM To: jhadv at pacifier.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples The whole point of dimpling is to induce a consistent and uniform amount of turbulence. This increases the range of a golf ball and allows much more precise control of trajectory and spin. On rockets the closest trick is the use of a turbulence inducing ring near the top of the body tube to induce turbulent boundary layer flow before it happens erratically at a somewhat more aft point. The NAR competition guys used a single layer wrap of Scotch tape. In rockets using nose cone separation, this usually occurs naturally at the NC/BT junction anyway. Experiments have been done using suction through tiny holes on wing surfaces to maintain laminar flow on the surface. I've wondered if that could be done on rocket body tubes using the suction of base drag. It'd take a very smooth tube and a kazillion tiny holes though. +McG+ > "I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he > said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds." > > That is my understanding as well and when I quit I was a 6 handicap. > Taking spin is also another characteristic of a dimpled design that might > not be ideal for this application. From what I have looked at the best > thing that can be done for the performance of our rockets (besides the > fineness ratio) would be the incorporation of near mach nose cones. The > best analogy is not the SR-71 or a sounding rocket but the nose of a > fighter plane. A vehicle that spends most of its time between .6 and 1.6 > Mach and that passes the barrier in both directions very efficiently. > Unless of course you're Mike Fisher in which case you might need more > complex designs depending on the precise application but the problem there > is that for the finer shapes (Von Karmen for example) the fidelity of the > actual nosecone to the design parameters is a large problem. Close does > not work. As in at all. May even hurt. > > > > >> Send Rockets mailing list submissions to >> rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> rockets-request at rocketsnw.com >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> rockets-owner at rocketsnw.com >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of Rockets digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. dimples? (Scott Berfield) >> 2. Re: dimples? (Schurke, Peter) >> 3. Re: dimples? (Hammer) >> 4. Re: dimples? (Bill Munds) >> 5. Re: dimples? (Hammer) >> 6. 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative (David Walp) >> 7. Re: The next 60 Acres launch in November (Hammer) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:57:28 +0000 >> From: "Scott Berfield" >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >> had >> thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >> anyone >> done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >> through >> the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? >> >> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >> be >> welcome. >> >> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >> military >> missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the >> case. >> >> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 >> From: "Schurke, Peter" >> To: "Scott Berfield" , >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B30030D at CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> Have you been watching MythBusters? >> >> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >> guys >> took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a clean >> one >> because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >> >> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the car >> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test (2" >> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >> the >> back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were identical... >> >> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >> smooth >> surface. >> >> Peter Schurke >> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >> Ingraham High School >> 1819 N 135th St. >> Seattle, WA 98133 >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> >> >> >> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >> had >> thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >> anyone >> done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >> through >> the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? >> >> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >> be >> welcome. >> >> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >> military >> missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the >> case. >> >> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:18:39 -0700 >> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: <4AE5150F.7050003 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> SkinzWraps: Shark Skin Improves Mileage >> http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/02/11/skinzwraps-shark-skin-improves-mileage/ >> >> Fastskinz (formerly Sharkskinz) Golf Ball Car Covering Gets Independent >> Testing >> http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/05/19/fastskinz-formerly-sharkskinz-golf-ball- car-covering-gets-independent-testing/ >> >> Fastskinz Test Drive: Can a Golf Ball Covering Improve MPGs? >> http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4316702.html >> >> http://www.fastskinz.com/ >> >> Buy some Fastskinz and put some on yer rocket to see if you notice a >> difference. >> >> Robert >> >> >> Schurke, Peter wrote: >>> Have you been watching MythBusters? >>> >>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >>> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a >>> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >>> >>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the >>> car >>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test >>> (2" >>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >>> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were >>> identical... >>> >>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >>> smooth surface. >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> >>> >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>> improved >>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>> ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>> to >>> be the case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 03:19:33 +0000 >> From: Bill Munds >> To: Peter Schurke , scott berfield >> , >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> >> Peter, >> >> Being a non-TV-reception-household, I didn't see the episode. >> >> Question thou,.....what kind of car was it? >> >> I think maybe why the car got better mileage with the 2" of clay is more >> a >> weight/mass issue than the "dimple effect". Basketball/bowling ball >> distance contest. >> >> Why a dirty car would get "better mileage" is questionable. Why would >> the >> aircraftmanufacturers even buff out the edges of the logo paint if it >> didn't make a HUGE difference in performance? >> >> >> >> >> Bill >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD >> Join me >> >> >> >>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 >>> From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org >>> To: sb at berfield.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> Have you been watching MythBusters? >>> >>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >>> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a >>> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >>> >>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the >>> car >>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test >>> (2" >>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >>> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were >>> identical... >>> >>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >>> smooth surface. >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> >>> >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>> improved >>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>> ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>> to >>> be the case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:21:10 -0700 >> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: <4AE515A6.4070806 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he >> said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds. >> >> Robert >> >> Scott Berfield wrote: >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>> improved >>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>> ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>> to >>> be the case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:34:02 -0700 >> From: "David Walp" >> To: >> Subject: [RocketsNW] 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative >> Message-ID: <001801ca55ed$2a390330$7eab0990$@net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> If you were at Mansfield Saturday, you may have seen the spectacular end >> of >> my son's Mad Cow Mozzie - we learned the hard way it is best if motor >> burns >> just through the nozzle and not both ends at the same time. My son has >> a >> soft spot for the Mozzie, so we are considering building another but >> thinking of doing some upgrades... :-) >> >> >> >> The fins for the Mozzie are large and proportionally really hang out >> there. >> The fins that come with the kit are made of 1/8th inch plywood and were >> warped in our original kit (yes I straightened them with limited >> success). >> I suspect if we get our hands on another kit, the fins are likely to be >> warped given the kit has been discontinued and likely been sitting >> around. >> Our thought is to cut new fins from another material. We think there >> would >> be several issues with thicker plywood, more weight, CG moving more aft >> and >> having to enlarge the size of the pre-sloted openings - came immediately >> to >> us. A better grade 1/8th inch plywood wood be one choice. Based on the >> chatter on this discussion group, we were also thinking of trying G10? >> We >> have not yet used G10. The Mozzie is only a mid power rocket, would G10 >> be >> over kill? Any other suggestions for material? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> _dave_ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 7 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:47:45 -0700 >> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> Message-ID: <4AE51BE1.1010900 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> He specifically said they weren't going to allow any "organized >> activities" on 60 Acres until spring time. The launches we've had so >> far have had no real host or sponsoring club and is an informal get >> together of rocketeers. So...yeah, it's definitely a disorganized >> bunch. >> >> >> >> Robert >> >> Schurke, Peter wrote: >>> So... >>> >>> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be allowed. >>> Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED we >>> can still use the field... >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM >>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>> >>> >>> >>> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on >>> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. >>> >>> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since >>> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring >>> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on >>> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't >>> be able to do so at that time, too. >>> >>> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near >>> Carnation. >>> >>> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field >>> between Monroe and Snohomish. >>> >>> Until then no rocketry in Seattle. >>> >>> Robert >>> >>> >>> >>> Dave Randall wrote: >>> >>>> My suggestion: >>>> >>>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >>>> >>>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >>>> >>>> dave >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the >>>>> county >>>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a >>>>> launch so >>>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>>>> >>>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I >>>>> can >>>>> keep them informed. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> George >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>>>> >>>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>>>> rockets >>>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third >>>>>> Sunday (8th >>>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a >>>>>> call >>>>>> to the >>>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>>>> >>>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>>>> >>>>>> Robert >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> End of Rockets Digest, Vol 21, Issue 99 >> *************************************** >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Mon Oct 26 05:00:58 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 05:00:58 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November In-Reply-To: References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net><5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox><6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com><4AE46945.6000902@earthlink.net><844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B300308@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> <99FF820DB9D84D2DB61F17CB68E3CDDF@LittleGoodBox> <97A36AC359BA4A798B00FF91BCE80357@LaptopKrausert> Message-ID: <4AE58F7A.50803@earthlink.net> Here is a good pic of 60 Acres from the air. http://www.crossfiresoccer.org/fields/index_E.html It's the south field where they have been doing the dirt work. Robert kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com wrote: > Yep, as a very small time hay farmer and seemingly professional cultivator > of grass and pigweed in my vegetable garden... > > If they've scraped the field down to bare dirt and planted new seed then > yes, it would be best to minimize use over the winter. But if the turf is > rooted in, well heck, I've deliberately pulled out all the rhizomes I > could find in my garden before winter and still had plenty of grass grow > back by mid-spring. I gave up on trying to kill off the grass without > resorting to chemicals. The main footpath here has been worn down to mud > over a winter and returned to green turf by summer. No reason to shoo off > a few rocketeers if the turf is rooted in! > > Turf type grass is designed not to die. > +McG+ > > > >> Hammer, >> I'm not one to raise a fuss or rattle cages. I wish you the best with 60A >> site. But I wonder if the time has come to file a lawsuit against the park >> district their blated and repeated denial of use. I saw those pictures of >> the launch with police there enjoying the show. Grass recovery ends in >> less >> than a month. The rest of the time, the roots are not growing. So >> trampling >> on the grass in the winter makes no difference. As long as they fertilized >> in the Fall the root system will germinate and grow fine when Spring temps >> increase and longer day light days. George makes a great point. Show up, >> fly, and see if any one dares to kick you out. 60A was a mess for you all >> for years, then it seemed like you had a breakthrough this past year. >> Someone in the parks committee was sheltered from rockets as a child and >> you're paying. Soccer is allowed, but you can easily break a bone playing >> that game. Rocketry is safe if people follow the rules. And that's the >> whole >> point of your sanctioned events. Even if it's a no-host event. It's >> amaizing >> how people will advise and correct othes. You might want to consider >> filing >> a case against them. Just a few things to think about. >> >> Wish the best. I say fly anyway. >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "George Christ" >> To: "Schurke, Peter" ; "Hammer" >> ; "NW Rocketry mailing list" >> >> Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 4:14 PM >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> >> >> >>> Agreed. I, for one, have no intention of ceasing to help out Scouts >>> working on the Space Exploration merit badge and other small-scale uses >>> of >>> 60 Acres for rocketry purposes. Peter, you and your TARC teams should >>> also >>> "fly on!" >>> >>> Despite the deals between King County Parks and LWYSA, 60 Acres is still >>> a >>> public park, paid for with Forward Thrust funds, and open to all. >>> >>> George >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Schurke, Peter" >>> To: "Hammer" ; "NW Rocketry mailing >>> list" >>> Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 3:11 PM >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>> >>> >>> >>>> So... >>>> >>>> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be allowed. >>>> Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED we >>>> can still use the field... >>>> >>>> Peter Schurke >>>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>>> Ingraham High School >>>> 1819 N 135th St. >>>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> >>>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer >>>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM >>>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >>>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on >>>> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. >>>> >>>> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since >>>> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring >>>> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on >>>> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't >>>> be able to do so at that time, too. >>>> >>>> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near >>>> Carnation. >>>> >>>> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field >>>> between Monroe and Snohomish. >>>> >>>> Until then no rocketry in Seattle. >>>> >>>> Robert >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Dave Randall wrote: >>>> >>>>> My suggestion: >>>>> >>>>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >>>>> >>>>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >>>>> >>>>> dave >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the >>>>>> county >>>>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a >>>>>> launch so >>>>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>>>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>>>>> >>>>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I >>>>>> can >>>>>> keep them informed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>> >>>>>> George >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>>>>> >>>>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>>>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>>>>> rockets >>>>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third >>>>>>> Sunday >>>>>>> (8th >>>>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a >>>>>>> call >>>>>>> to the >>>>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Robert >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> > > > > From pmschurke at seattleschools.org Mon Oct 26 06:25:30 2009 From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org (Schurke, Peter) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 06:25:30 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net><5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox><6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com><4AE46945.6000902@earthlink.net><844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B300308@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org><99FF820DB9D84D2DB61F17CB68E3CDDF@LittleGoodBox> <4AE522E8.2000008@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B30030F@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> My understanding from the whole process that we just went through last year was that it is still a public park, but in exchange for LWYSA funding the "improvements" to the fields, the King County Parks Dept. ceded right of first scheduling--and effectively control--to them. I however am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV. Heck, I didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn Express in the last week. So don't take my sketchy recollection as any kind of gospel. Peter Schurke Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy Ingraham High School 1819 N 135th St. Seattle, WA 98133 ________________________________ From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 9:17 PM To: NW Rocketry mailing list Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November Is it still a public park if the county handed over the keys to the LWYSA? Is it still funded by the tax payers or by money from the LWYSA? I happened to drive by there today and saw the dirt work they've done so far. I'm sure that came out of the LWYSA's pocket. robert George Christ wrote: > Agreed. I, for one, have no intention of ceasing to help out Scouts > working on the Space Exploration merit badge and other small-scale > uses of 60 Acres for rocketry purposes. Peter, you and your TARC teams > should also "fly on!" > > Despite the deals between King County Parks and LWYSA, 60 Acres is > still a public park, paid for with Forward Thrust funds, and open to all. > > George > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Schurke, Peter" > > To: "Hammer" ; "NW Rocketry mailing > list" > Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 3:11 PM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November > > >> So... >> >> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be >> allowed. Which, by extension means that if we're really, really >> DISORGANIZED we can still use the field... >> >> Peter Schurke >> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >> Ingraham High School >> 1819 N 135th St. >> Seattle, WA 98133 >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer >> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> >> >> >> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on >> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. >> >> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since >> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring >> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on >> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't >> be able to do so at that time, too. >> >> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near >> Carnation. >> >> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field >> between Monroe and Snohomish. >> >> Until then no rocketry in Seattle. >> >> Robert >> >> >> >> Dave Randall wrote: >>> My suggestion: >>> >>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >>> >>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >>> >>> dave >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>> wrote: >>> >>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the >>>> county >>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a >>>> launch so >>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>>> >>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so >>>> I can >>>> keep them informed. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> George >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>>> >>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>>> rockets >>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third >>>>> Sunday (8th >>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a >>>>> call to the >>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>>> >>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>>> >>>>> Robert >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From blakbird11 at comcast.net Mon Oct 26 07:53:01 2009 From: blakbird11 at comcast.net (Eric Albrecht) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 07:53:01 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? In-Reply-To: <102620090455.25893.4AE52BDC0007F8020000652522230680329B0A02D29B9B0EBF0404010BD206D29B@att.net> References: <102620090455.25893.4AE52BDC0007F8020000652522230680329B0A02D29B9B0EBF0404010BD206D29B@att.net> Message-ID: OK, I'll through some mud at the issue, so to speak. There are multiple kinds of drag. Skin drag is caused by the roughness of the surface over which the fluid is flowing. Pressure drag is caused by a combination of the high pressure at the front of a moving body and the low pressure at the rear of a moving body. And then there is wave drag which is caused by the formation and propagation of shock waves. There are other kinds too, but these will suffice for this discussion. In the first "dirty car" Mythbusters test, they effectively increased the skin drag, lowering the efficiency. The "gold ball effect" works on pressure drag. This is most noticeable on a non-aerodynamic body and, as it turns out, the sphere is one of the least aerodynamic bodies there is. The problem, like you saw on the show, is that the fluid flow separates at the rear of the body causing a "dead spot" of low pressure. This low pressure sucks the body backward producing drag. This is also noticeable in a convertible where you will actually experience *forward* airflow behind the windshield. Anyway, it turns out that a laminar (smooth) boundary layer at the surface, such as you get on a smooth body at low speeds, tends to separate and create a large wake. A mildly turbulent boundary layer, such as is generated by dimples, tends to cause the flow to stick to the surface and delay separation, reducing pressure drag. On the other hand, it *increases* skin drag. In the end, this effect is most helpful at low speeds over a body with a significant wake. A properly designed aircraft or rocket, on the other hand, is not at low speeds and does not have a significant wake. And at very high speeds, wave drag swamps everything else anyway. At very high speeds, turbulence is a "very bad thing", and could even result in structural failure. In the WWII time frame, aircraft makers started countersinking all the rivet heads to make a smooth surface which made a HUGE increase in performance. Obviously this means that rivet head "dimples" do not improve performance when sticking out. Just for a point of reference though, airplanes do sometimes employ such a thing. A "clean" wing (with all high lift device stowed) is very aerodynamic as has a minimal wake. However, when leading edge slats and trailing edge flaps are deployed and the aircraft is at a high angle of attack, the wake is huge. In such cases, we employ "vortex generators" on the leading edge. These are little shark fin looking devices which create a turbulent boundary layer to keep it attached. Note however that they are both very small and are used at low speeds. Short answer, dimples are not for rockets unless you want to make whistling noises. Eric Albrecht On Oct 25, 2009, at 9:55 PM, t.j.doll at att.net wrote: >> Question thou,.....what kind of car was it? >> I think maybe why the car got better mileage with the 2" of clay is >> more a >> weight/mass issue than the "dimple effect". Basketball/bowling >> ball distance >> contest. >> >> Why a dirty car would get "better mileage" is questionable. Why >> would the >> aircraftmanufacturers even buff out the edges of the logo paint if >> it didn't >> make a HUGE difference in performance? > > I'm not sure what kind of car it was - it might have been a Ford > Taurus but I really wasn't paying attention to that. > But the only part of the testing I could take issue with was that > they didn't redo the 'control'. The took the car, added a layer of > smooth clay, then did the mileage testing (one mile run at a steady > 65 mph, repeated 5 times). I think they said the clay added 800 > pounds - but with the clay was the baseline. They then added the > 'dimples', took the removed clay and threw it in the back seat to > keep the weight constant, then repeated the mileage testing. They > got better than a 2 mpg improvement. > > I was skeptical they'd get a significant improvement - modern cars > are, unlike a golf ball, designed to be aerodynamic - but the > results are pretty hard to argue with. > > But as noted, there is a big difference between 65 mph and 600 > mph...... One of the big issues in the Boeing transonic wind tunnel > is getting turbulent flow on a (relatively) small model, since > turbulent flow starts very quickly at near Mach speeds. > > Tim > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From blakbird11 at comcast.net Mon Oct 26 07:55:47 2009 From: blakbird11 at comcast.net (Eric Albrecht) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 07:55:47 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Dimples In-Reply-To: <000601ca561b$638840a0$2a98c1e0$@net> References: <3022.76.115.45.22.1256532440.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> <382c6c1797a0f79c70d8e2e88b4f104b.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> <000601ca561b$638840a0$2a98c1e0$@net> Message-ID: <82554B91-468D-4A0B-ABBF-8F045F111A0D@comcast.net> On Oct 26, 2009, at 2:04 AM, Dave Proffitt wrote: > I'm really surprised it had any affect on mileage at all. Drag > increases > with the square of velocity if I remember things right, so a car at > 60 mph > is not generating anywhere near the amount of drag a jet would at > 600 mph. > There was a deal on muscle cars back in the 60's. Pontiac made a big > deal > out of it with the GTO, and they even named the motor after it. They > called > it a Ram air IV. In drag racing, it's not really effective on cars > that run > just a little over 100 mph. The ram effect doesn't really do much > until the > car gets into the 100 mph realm. Most super gas cars do good to get > 145-150 > mph in the quarter much less a 4000 lb Goat that runs 98 mph or > maybe 105 > mph. There's much more power to be had using a cold air intake than > messing > around with ram air. I'm off the subject now. Gee how did I manage > that? Not > hard for me. I'm guessing that most of the mileage variation on the show was caused by changes in wind speed and direction, which they did not account for. There were many hours (or days) between the different types of trials. Eric Albrecht From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 26 07:58:10 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 07:58:10 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative In-Reply-To: <017f01ca55ef$747f6090$5d7e21b0$@net> References: <001801ca55ed$2a390330$7eab0990$@net> <017f01ca55ef$747f6090$5d7e21b0$@net> Message-ID: I would go with a thin G10 you do not need an 1/8th of an inch in thickness and you can always fiil the extra space in the fin slots. I have found it is easy to work G10 as long as you have access to a bandsaw. After you get the fins mounted and fill the extra space then you will run a layer of fiberglass over the fins and body tube on the fincan area. One thing when you are cutting or sanding G10 you must wear a dust mask or respirator, you really do not want that stuff in your lungs. As for that being overkill for a midpower rocket I think not and I would give it the ability to go high power and midpower. You can get a 29mm or a 38mm motor mount for it as they both have midpower reloads. The 29mm can go all the way down to F while the 38mm has some G's. An then when you wish to you can pop in H and I motors with the 29mm and and even a J with the 38mm. The Mozzie will handle just fine under High Power. It will also give you the excuse to get your High Power certification if you do not already have it. On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Marty Weiser wrote: > Dave, > > A better grade of plywood is probably your best bet. Finnish birch is one > of the better grades out there and Mike Fisher of Binder Design said he has > found it to be better in his kits. > > G10 is denser than plywood and much more difficult to work. It is also > probably overkill for more mid-power rockets. It is probably overkill for > a > lot of high power rockets as well. > > If you want a lighter weight fin you can laminate very thin plywood or G10 > to foam core. > > Marty > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of David Walp > Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 8:34 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative > > Hi, > > > > If you were at Mansfield Saturday, you may have seen the spectacular end of > my son's Mad Cow Mozzie - we learned the hard way it is best if motor burns > just through the nozzle and not both ends at the same time. My son has a > soft spot for the Mozzie, so we are considering building another but > thinking of doing some upgrades... :-) > > > > The fins for the Mozzie are large and proportionally really hang out there. > The fins that come with the kit are made of 1/8th inch plywood and were > warped in our original kit (yes I straightened them with limited success). > I suspect if we get our hands on another kit, the fins are likely to be > warped given the kit has been discontinued and likely been sitting around. > Our thought is to cut new fins from another material. We think there would > be several issues with thicker plywood, more weight, CG moving more aft and > having to enlarge the size of the pre-sloted openings - came immediately to > us. A better grade 1/8th inch plywood wood be one choice. Based on the > chatter on this discussion group, we were also thinking of trying G10? We > have not yet used G10. The Mozzie is only a mid power rocket, would G10 be > over kill? Any other suggestions for material? > > > > Thanks, > > _dave_ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From Mfreptiles at aol.com Mon Oct 26 09:12:10 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:12:10 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative Message-ID: If you use a bandsaw, you have to use a blade designed to cut metal or it will remove all the teeth from the blade in about two seconds. Even with a blade designed to cut metal, it will dull after a few minutes. A better tool is a diamond wet-saw. The only drawback to them is that they won't cut curves. For those fins, you can still use the 1/8" ply and do a layer of FG or CF on each side and press flat. Still nice and light and not prone to flutter like the thinner G-10 stock. Mike F. In a message dated 10/26/2009 7:59:17 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, guentherchristopher at gmail.com writes: I have found it is easy to work G10 as long as you have access to a bandsaw. From Simpsonclark at aol.com Mon Oct 26 09:25:36 2009 From: Simpsonclark at aol.com (Simpsonclark at aol.com) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:25:36 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 Message-ID: G10, carbon fiber, kevlar all cut like butter with a jeweler's coping saw ($20). Blades dull fairly quickly, but only cost about $20 a gross. The blades come in a dozen or so sizes starting with a kerf in the 3 or 4 thousandths range. I generally use a #2, but it isn't critical. Only limitation is the reach of the saw. -Robert From winglee at ess.washington.edu Mon Oct 26 09:19:59 2009 From: winglee at ess.washington.edu (Robert M. Winglee) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 09:19:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] UW Flights at Mansfield Message-ID: I first want to thank all the WAC members for assisting my students in getting their projects off the ground - particularly the RSOs who worked with the students and helped them in giving the final review of their projects, and aiding their understanding of critical issues. Also thanks to Carl Hamilton for assisting in our L2 cert flights. So our many group of about 30 people launched several projects some with some very interesting results. We did launch several successful cert flights L1 - Bob Frost (our volunteer electrical engineer) L2 - Melissa Rogers L2 - Keith Cowan (also carrying electronic telemetry system showing apogee close to 7000 ft and a speed of 0.8 Mach) L2 - Michele Cash (similar performance but with a 60 in parachute at apogee had one of the longest hang times I have witnessed - I think I stopped watching after 10 mins). We then launch 2 additional L1 test flights followed by some attempts at transonic flight. Our first attempt was a minimum diameter 2in on a K550. It took off at high speed but something tore off near Mach 1 and the rocket disintegrated. Not sure what fell off because we couldn't find sufficient pieces. We next launched our Delta IV rocket- this was our first attempt at a clustered launch. It left the launch pad with the side boosters ignited but what appeared to be with the main engine unlit. The rocket stalled out at about 750 ft after the boosters had burnt out, started falling backward, and then the main engine came up to pressure, and then give a semi-regular flight except the delay in ignition timing through the parachute deployment off. Examination of the movie shows part of igniter falling out at ignition which presumably aided the long delay in main motor pressurization. Our second attempt at transonic flight was on a 3in quantum leap on a K695. This was a perfect flight, reaching Mac 1.3 with apogee at 9000ft. This was greet by cheers by our many hardworking students. We then launched a very sporty L1 Phobos on a H268 - it had dual deployment but the students only hooked up the main so straight up to 4000 ft and straigh down to 500 ft when main deployed. I haven't seen the rocket to see how big the zipper was. The last launch for saturday (thanks to the patience of the RCOs) was our two stage L1. Booster went off perfectly, and while the electronics for the sustainer worked perfectly, there was a delay in bringing the motor up to pressure that was longer than anticipated so that thrusting occurred as the rocket was just starting to arc. The sustainer had a nice flight into the shadows of sunset. Thanks to Bob Yanecek who got a line on the rocket and recovered it on Sunday morning. Our group returned to UW saturday night arriving at 11pm, have set out at 5:30 am. Again a bit thanks to the WAC for their efforts for the event and support of our students. The students will be examining the data over the next few months and see how we can improve. See you all in Spring. Robert -- *********************************************************** Prof. Robert Winglee, Chair Department of Earth and Space Sciences Phone: 206-685-8160 Box 351310 Fax : 206-685-3815 Univ. of Washington Seattle WA 98195-1310 ************************************************************ From sb at berfield.com Mon Oct 26 10:13:27 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 10:13:27 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? Message-ID: <200910261713.n9QHDSwJ032125@omr17.networksolutionsemail.com> Great, clear explanation, thanks. I love that no matter what I come up with to ask about, someone out there actually knows something about it and is willing to explain things clearly. I always wondered what those little fins were for on wings. -----Original Message----- From: Eric Albrecht Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 7:53 AM To: Rocket Lost Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? OK, I'll through some mud at the issue, so to speak. There are multiple kinds of drag. Skin drag is caused by the roughness of the surface over which the fluid is flowing. Pressure drag is caused by a combination of the high pressure at the front of a moving body and the low pressure at the rear of a moving body. And then there is wave drag which is caused by the formation and propagation of shock waves. There are other kinds too, but these will suffice for this discussion. In the first "dirty car" Mythbusters test, they effectively increased the skin drag, lowering the efficiency. The "gold ball effect" works on pressure drag. This is most noticeable on a non-aerodynamic body and, as it turns out, the sphere is one of the least aerodynamic bodies there is. The problem, like you saw on the show, is that the fluid flow separates at the rear of the body causing a "dead spot" of low pressure. This low pressure sucks the body backward producing drag. This is also noticeable in a convertible where you will actually experience *forward* airflow behind the windshield. Anyway, it turns out that a laminar (smooth) boundary layer at the surface, such as you get on a smooth body at low speeds, tends to separate and create a large wake. A mildly turbulent boundary layer, such as is generated by dimples, tends to cause the flow to stick to the surface and delay separation, reducing pressure drag. On the other hand, it *increases* skin drag. In the end, this effect is most helpful at low speeds over a body with a significant wake. A properly designed aircraft or rocket, on the other hand, is not at low speeds and does not have a significant wake. And at very high speeds, wave drag swamps everything else anyway. At very high speeds, turbulence is a "very bad thing", and could even result in structural failure. In the WWII time frame, aircraft makers started countersinking all the rivet heads to make a smooth surface which made a HUGE increase in performance. Obviously this means that rivet head "dimples" do not improve performance when sticking out. Just for a point of reference though, airplanes do sometimes employ such a thing. A "clean" wing (with all high lift device stowed) is very aerodynamic as has a minimal wake. However, when leading edge slats and trailing edge flaps are deployed and the aircraft is at a high angle of attack, the wake is huge. In such cases, we employ "vortex generators" on the leading edge. These are little shark fin looking devices which create a turbulent boundary layer to keep it attached. Note however that they are both very small and are used at low speeds. Short answer, dimples are not for rockets unless you want to make whistling noises. Eric Albrecht On Oct 25, 2009, at 9:55 PM, t.j.doll at att.net wrote: >> Question thou,.....what kind of car was it? >> I think maybe why the car got better mileage with the 2" of clay is >> more a >> weight/mass issue than the "dimple effect". Basketball/bowling >> ball distance >> contest. >> >> Why a dirty car would get "better mileage" is questionable. Why >> would the >> aircraftmanufacturers even buff out the edges of the logo paint if >> it didn't >> make a HUGE difference in performance? > > I'm not sure what kind of car it was - it might have been a Ford > Taurus but I really wasn't paying attention to that. > But the only part of the testing I could take issue with was that > they didn't redo the 'control'. The took the car, added a layer of > smooth clay, then did the mileage testing (one mile run at a steady > 65 mph, repeated 5 times). I think they said the clay added 800 > pounds - but with the clay was the baseline. They then added the > 'dimples', took the removed clay and threw it in the back seat to > keep the weight constant, then repeated the mileage testing. They > got better than a 2 mpg improvement. > > I was skeptical they'd get a significant improvement - modern cars > are, unlike a golf ball, designed to be aerodynamic - but the > results are pretty hard to argue with. > > But as noted, there is a big difference between 65 mph and 600 > mph...... One of the big issues in the Boeing transonic wind tunnel > is getting turbulent flow on a (relatively) small model, since > turbulent flow starts very quickly at near Mach speeds. > > Tim > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Mon Oct 26 12:27:06 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:27:06 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The unorganized, drop-in only Turkey Shoot launch, Sunday, 22NOV09/10:00AM-5:00PM Message-ID: <4AE5F80A.6010208@earthlink.net> I'd like to invite Dave Randall to the Turkey Shoot launch scheduled for Sunday, 22NOV09 from 10:00AM to 5:00PM at 60 Acres Park. This is a unorganized launch with no host or organizer or coordinated with LWYSA. This is a BYOGSE non-event. Barring rain, snow or some other unforeseen event, happen to be in the area and see Dave out there launching rockets feel free to drop in and launch a few yourself! The field might be wet or muddy so don't forget waterproof footwear. Dress warmly because I am sure it's going to be on the chilly side! Robert From brodwcjj at integrity.com Mon Oct 26 12:49:49 2009 From: brodwcjj at integrity.com (brodwcjj at integrity.com) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:49:49 -0500 Subject: [RocketsNW] Dimples In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4ec17aa3374fe03580832a2bba4a75d3.squirrel@wm.integrity.com> Turbulence inducing ring? I think I have heard of that being tried at Balls ! It was a powdered sugar donut "ring" on the nose cone of a rocket with a "Q" motor. Not sure if it helped altitude. ;-P As for a LPR rocket with dimpled nose cone: https://www.discountrocketry.com/level-1-model-rocket-kits/estes-rockit-stone-flyer-rocket-p-1700.html Dustin From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples On rockets the closest trick is the use of a turbulence inducing ring near the top of the body tube to induce turbulent boundary layer flow before it happens erratically at a somewhat more aft point. +McG+ From jhadv at pacifier.com Mon Oct 26 12:49:55 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (Paul Bogdanich) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:49:55 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20091026124230.00c2d7b8@mail.iinet.com> I know I am probably a neophyte here but I have never had any problem with cutting G-10 using narrow large tooth count carbide blades on a table saw. I use a dedicated blade for the purpose (narrow) and it hasn't gone dull yet. End mills make short work of G-10 also. Lathe tools hate it and the dust is terrible. From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Mon Oct 26 13:03:27 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 13:03:27 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20091026124230.00c2d7b8@mail.iinet.com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20091026124230.00c2d7b8@mail.iinet.com> Message-ID: I myself have always used my bandsaw on G10 and have never had any dulling issues. The dust is the big thing, like I said before wear a mask or respirator and eye protection. You do not want it in your lungs or eyes. On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Paul Bogdanich wrote: > I know I am probably a neophyte here but I have never had any problem with > cutting G-10 using narrow large tooth count carbide blades on a table saw. > I use a dedicated blade for the purpose (narrow) and it hasn't gone dull > yet. End mills make short work of G-10 also. Lathe tools hate it and the > dust is terrible. > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From rcdm at outlawnet.com Mon Oct 26 14:28:47 2009 From: rcdm at outlawnet.com (Moorehead) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:28:47 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 References: <5.2.0.9.2.20091026124230.00c2d7b8@mail.iinet.com> Message-ID: I've had good luck cutting G10 on my table saw with a 7" diamond cement blade. Contractors around here use them for cutting Hardie Plank type house siding. I got one at the local lumber yard for about $10-15. http://www.exchangeablade.com/ Look under "diamond blades" mine is a 7" bronze series "turbo" blade #2118892. I quickly figured out than my carbide cabinet blades would cut G10 just fine, but they wouldn't cut wood very well afterwards. Rod M. From robert.krausert at intel.com Mon Oct 26 14:31:19 2009 From: robert.krausert at intel.com (Krausert, Robert) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:31:19 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20091026124230.00c2d7b8@mail.iinet.com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20091026124230.00c2d7b8@mail.iinet.com> Message-ID: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43D227DC@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Hello, Let me comment here regarding G10. I own a Ridgid 3624 tablesaw. This is a very nice table and was setup with a carbide wood blade. I rubber cemented G10 to a piece of plywood and ran it through the table saw. About two inches into the cut a tooth hooked the G10 and became close to bringing the blade to zero speed. Before it did, the plywood with G10 snapped and a chunk caught the blade wrong, blew into pieces and sent them flying into me. I have four scars on my stomach area, two are over one inch long. Those pieces cut through my t-shirt and skin like they were tissue paper. All in a brief second. Could have been so much worse. After the saw was turned off, I checked the blade and it was warped by the incident. As for me, I didn't feel anything. Then I noticed the bleeding. G10 over heats blades fast and quick break down the tempering and thus quickly dulling. I'm not sure of the best specs. A good metal blade is costly, because you're going to ruin it. If you were going to, I'll let others suggest. But I'm guessing at least 24 teeth per inch, short teeth. Get a handful of the cheaper blades. That way you feel less bad when you kill them. Plus each dull blade becomes another blast deflector for your GSE gear. A bunch of dull $10 blades feels better than a bunch of $70 dull blades. Just stay safe. For my saw that's a 60 tooth blade at 10K RPM is 10,000 teeth passing by each second. Or "stuff" can happen in as little as 0.0001 seconds. Cheers, Robert -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Paul Bogdanich Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 12:50 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 I know I am probably a neophyte here but I have never had any problem with cutting G-10 using narrow large tooth count carbide blades on a table saw. I use a dedicated blade for the purpose (narrow) and it hasn't gone dull yet. End mills make short work of G-10 also. Lathe tools hate it and the dust is terrible. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Mon Oct 26 14:48:45 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:48:45 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Dimples Message-ID: Speaking of bullets: http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/2009/04/01/us-army-team-tests-radical-new-dimpled-bullet/ -----Original Message----- From: Dave Proffitt [mailto:bigrockets at verizon.net] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 02:04 AM To: 'OROC List' Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples I think your speaking of boundary layer control Ken? One aircraft inparticular, a jet, can't remember the model but it employed boundary layercontrol and it worked pretty good. The biggest problem with it was therewere so many small holes and they kept getting plugged up with dirt. I guessit was a real maintenance nightmare so they gave it up as a bad job. As far as dimpling bullets go, I think we're getting into the realm ofReynolds numbers VS bullet drag here. I've done lots of target shooting.Mostly .30 caliber stuff. The .30 caliber match bullets have some very goodsectional density and ballistic coefficients. The 220 grain Sierra Matchkinghollow point boat tail seems to me to have a BC of .746 above 2800 fps. Partof this is due the sectional density of a 220 bullet and the rest of it withthe velocity. Bullets seem to have a sweet spot they like to operate in fora given design. My .338-.378 will shoot a 300 grain Matchking at its optimalvelocity and has a BC of almost.800. Good target bullets are a model ofstreamlining and aerodynamics. Most don't bleed velocity or energy untilthey get out past 300 yards or so. It's a wonderment to me that they evenstay together at the rotational speed they fly at. The V2 reminds me of a bullet with fins. It has a spire point and a boattail, just doesn't rotate as fast as a bullet does. As far as the Myth Busters show with the clay on the car, I have a real hardtime believeing they put on 800 lbs of it? I missed that part of the showthat told how much they put on but it looked like there was only about a 4inch layer of clay on it. I don't know maybe that much clay would weigh 800lbs? The car didn't squat much like it had that much extra weight on ithowever. I'm really surprised it had any affect on mileage at all. Drag increaseswith the square of velocity if I remember things right, so a car at 60 mphis not generating anywhere near the amount of drag a jet would at 600 mph.There was a deal on muscle cars back in the 60's. Pontiac made a big dealout of it with the GTO, and they even named the motor after it. They calledit a Ram air IV. In drag racing, it's not really effective on cars that runjust a little over 100 mph. The ram effect doesn't really do much until thecar gets into the 100 mph realm. Most super gas cars do good to get 145-150mph in the quarter much less a 4000 lb Goat that runs 98 mph or maybe 105mph. There's much more power to be had using a cold air intake than messingaround with ram air. I'm off the subject now. Gee how did I manage that? Nothard for me.I found a place in Boring that does graphics work. I have not talked to theowner yet, seems like every time I stop by he's gone somewhere. Last timewas close to lunch. I'm gonna ask him if he would do some graphics on one ofmy rockets, before I clear coat it. How about a Velociraptor on aVelociraptor Brad? Just thinking out loud.Dave Proffitt-----Original Message-----From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com]On Behalf Of kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.comSent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 11:11 PMTo: jhadv at pacifier.comCc: rockets at rocketsnw.comSubject: Re: [RocketsNW] DimplesThe whole point of dimpling is to induce a consistent and uniform amountof turbulence. This increases the range of a golf ball and allows muchmore precise control of trajectory and spin.On rockets the closest trick is the use of a turbulence inducing ring nearthe top of the body tube to induce turbulent boundary layer flow before ithappens erratically at a somewhat more aft point. The NAR competitionguys used a single layer wrap of Scotch tape. In rockets using nose coneseparation, this usually occurs naturally at the NC/BT junction anyway.Experiments have been done using suction through tiny holes on wingsurfaces to maintain laminar flow on the surface. I've wondered if thatcould be done on rocket body tubes using the suction of base drag. It'dtake a very smooth tube and a kazillion tiny holes though.+McG+> "I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he> said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds.">> That is my understanding as well and when I quit I was a 6 handicap.> Taking spin is also another characteristic of a dimpled design that might> not be ideal for this application. From what I have looked at the best> thing that can be done for the performance of our rockets (besides the> fineness ratio) would be the incorporation of near mach nose cones. The> best analogy is not the SR-71 or a sounding rocket but the nose of a> fighter plane. A vehicle that spends most of its time between .6 and 1.6> Mach and that passes the barrier in both directions very efficiently.> Unless of course you're Mike Fisher in which case you might need more> complex designs depending on the precise application but the problem there> is that for the finer shapes (Von Karmen for example) the fidelity of the> actual nosecone to the design parameters is a large problem. Close does> not work. As in at all. May even hurt.>>>>>> Send Rockets mailing list submissions to>> rockets at rocketsnw.com>>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to>> rockets-request at rocketsnw.com>>>> You can reach the person managing the list at>> rockets-owner at rocketsnw.com>>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific>> than "Re: Contents of Rockets digest...">>>>>> Today's Topics:>>>> 1. dimples? (Scott Berfield)>> 2. Re: dimples? (Schurke, Peter)>> 3. Re: dimples? (Hammer)>> 4. Re: dimples? (Bill Munds)>> 5. Re: dimples? (Hammer)>> 6. 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative (David Walp)>> 7. Re: The next 60 Acres launch in November (Hammer)>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------->>>> Message: 1>> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:57:28 +0000>> From: "Scott Berfield" >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples?>> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8">>>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I>> had>> thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has>> anyone>> done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved>> through>> the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball?>>>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would>> be>> welcome.>>>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in>> military>> missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the>> case.>>>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way.>>>>>>>> ------------------------------>>>> Message: 2>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700>> From: "Schurke, Peter" >> To: "Scott Berfield" , >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples?>> Message-ID:>><844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B30030D at CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1">>>> Have you been watching MythBusters?>>>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the>> guys>> took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a clean>> one>> because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects".>>>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the car>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it,>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test (2">> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in>> the>> back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were identical...>>>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a>> smooth>> surface.>>>> Peter Schurke>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy>> Ingraham High School>> 1819 N 135th St.>> Seattle, WA 98133>>>> ________________________________>>>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples?>>>>>>>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I>> had>> thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has>> anyone>> done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved>> through>> the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball?>>>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would>> be>> welcome.>>>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in>> military>> missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the>> case.>>>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way.>>>> _______________________________________________>> Rockets mailing list>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------>>>> Message: 3>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:18:39 -0700>> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples?>> Message-ID: <4AE5150F.7050003 at earthlink.net>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed>>>> SkinzWraps: Shark Skin Improves Mileage>>http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/02/11/skinzwraps-shark-skin-improves-mileage/>>>> Fastskinz (formerly Sharkskinz) Golf Ball Car Covering Gets Independent>> Testing>>http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/05/19/fastskinz-formerly-sharkskinz-golf-ball-car-covering-gets-independent-testing/>>>> Fastskinz Test Drive: Can a Golf Ball Covering Improve MPGs?>> http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4316702.html>>>> http://www.fastskinz.com/>>>> Buy some Fastskinz and put some on yer rocket to see if you notice a>> difference.>>>> Robert>>>>>> Schurke, Peter wrote:>>> Have you been watching MythBusters?>>>>>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the>>> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a>>> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects".>>>>>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable>>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the>>> car>>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it,>>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test>>> (2">>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all>>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in>>> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were>>> identical...>>>>>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a>>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a>>> smooth surface.>>>>>> Peter Schurke>>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor>>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy>>> Ingraham High School>>> 1819 N 135th St.>>> Seattle, WA 98133>>>>>> ________________________________>>>>>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield>>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM>>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples?>>>>>>>>>>>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I>>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has>>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be>>> improved>>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf>>> ball?>>>>>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear>>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on>>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would>>> be welcome.>>>>>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in>>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear>>> to>>> be the case.>>>>>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with>>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see>>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way.>>>>>> _______________________________________________>>> Rockets mailing list>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________>>> Rockets mailing list>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------>>>> Message: 4>> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 03:19:33 +0000>> From: Bill Munds >> To: Peter Schurke , scott berfield>> , >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples?>> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1">>>>>> Peter,>>>> Being a non-TV-reception-household, I didn't see the episode.>>>> Question thou,.....what kind of car was it?>>>> I think maybe why the car got better mileage with the 2" of clay is more>> a>> weight/mass issue than the "dimple effect". Basketball/bowling ball>> distance contest.>>>> Why a dirty car would get "better mileage" is questionable. Why would>> the>> aircraftmanufacturers even buff out the edges of the logo paint if it>> didn't make a HUGE difference in performance?>>>>>>>>>> Bill>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD>> Join me>>>>>>>>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700>>> From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org>>> To: sb at berfield.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com>>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples?>>>>>> Have you been watching MythBusters?>>>>>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the>>> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a>>> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects".>>>>>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable>>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the>>> car>>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it,>>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test>>> (2">>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all>>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in>>> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were>>> identical...>>>>>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a>>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a>>> smooth surface.>>>>>> Peter Schurke>>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor>>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy>>> Ingraham High School>>> 1819 N 135th St.>>> Seattle, WA 98133>>>>>> ________________________________>>>>>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield>>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM>>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples?>>>>>>>>>>>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I>>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has>>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be>>> improved>>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf>>> ball?>>>>>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear>>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on>>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would>>> be welcome.>>>>>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in>>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear>>> to>>> be the case.>>>>>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with>>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see>>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way.>>>>>> _______________________________________________>>> Rockets mailing list>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________>>> Rockets mailing list>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------>>>> Message: 5>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:21:10 -0700>> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples?>> Message-ID: <4AE515A6.4070806 at earthlink.net>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed>>>> I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he>> said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds.>>>> Robert>>>> Scott Berfield wrote:>>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I>>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has>>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be>>> improved>>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf>>> ball?>>>>>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear>>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on>>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would>>> be welcome.>>>>>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in>>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear>>> to>>> be the case.>>>>>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with>>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see>>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way.>>>>>> _______________________________________________>>> Rockets mailing list>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------>>>> Message: 6>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:34:02 -0700>> From: "David Walp" >> To: >> Subject: [RocketsNW] 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative>> Message-ID: <001801ca55ed$2a390330$7eab0990$@net>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii">>>> Hi,>>>>>>>> If you were at Mansfield Saturday, you may have seen the spectacular end>> of>> my son's Mad Cow Mozzie - we learned the hard way it is best if motor>> burns>> just through the nozzle and not both ends at the same time. My son has>> a>> soft spot for the Mozzie, so we are considering building another but>> thinking of doing some upgrades... :-)>>>>>>>> The fins for the Mozzie are large and proportionally really hang out>> there.>> The fins that come with the kit are made of 1/8th inch plywood and were>> warped in our original kit (yes I straightened them with limited>> success).>> I suspect if we get our hands on another kit, the fins are likely to be>> warped given the kit has been discontinued and likely been sitting>> around.>> Our thought is to cut new fins from another material. We think there>> would>> be several issues with thicker plywood, more weight, CG moving more aft>> and>> having to enlarge the size of the pre-sloted openings - came immediately>> to>> us. A better grade 1/8th inch plywood wood be one choice. Based on the>> chatter on this discussion group, we were also thinking of trying G10?>> We>> have not yet used G10. The Mozzie is only a mid power rocket, would G10>> be>> over kill? Any other suggestions for material?>>>>>>>> Thanks,>>>> _dave_>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------>>>> Message: 7>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:47:45 -0700>> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November>> Message-ID: <4AE51BE1.1010900 at earthlink.net>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed>>>> He specifically said they weren't going to allow any "organized>> activities" on 60 Acres until spring time. The launches we've had so>> far have had no real host or sponsoring club and is an informal get>> together of rocketeers. So...yeah, it's definitely a disorganized>> bunch.>>>>>>>> Robert>>>> Schurke, Peter wrote:>>> So...>>>>>> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be allowed.>>> Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED we>>> can still use the field...>>>>>> Peter Schurke>>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor>>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy>>> Ingraham High School>>> 1819 N 135th St.>>> Seattle, WA 98133>>>>>> ________________________________>>>>>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer>>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM>>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list>>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November>>>>>>>>>>>> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on>>> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend.>>>>>> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since>>> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring>>> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on>>> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't>>> be able to do so at that time, too.>>>>>> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near>>> Carnation.>>>>>> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field>>> between Monroe and Snohomish.>>>>>> Until then no rocketry in Seattle.>>>>>> Robert>>>>>>>>>>>> Dave Randall wrote:>>>>>>> My suggestion:>>>>>>>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :)>>>>>>>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so!>>>>>>>> dave>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>>> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the>>>>> county>>>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a>>>>> launch so>>>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was>>>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th.>>>>>>>>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I>>>>> can>>>>> keep them informed.>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!>>>>>>>>>> George>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer">>>>> >>>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM>>>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your>>>>>> rockets>>>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third>>>>>> Sunday (8th>>>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a>>>>>> call>>>>>> to the>>>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you.>>>>>>>>>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions?>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert>>>>>> _______________________________________________>>>>>> Rockets mailing list>>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com>>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________>>>>> Rockets mailing list>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________>>> Rockets mailing list>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------>>>> _______________________________________________>> Rockets mailing list>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>>>>> End of Rockets Digest, Vol 21, Issue 99>> ***************************************>>>>>>> _______________________________________________> Rockets mailing list> Rockets at rocketsnw.com> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From bigrockets at verizon.net Mon Oct 26 14:52:00 2009 From: bigrockets at verizon.net (Dave Proffitt) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:52:00 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.2.20091026124230.00c2d7b8@mail.iinet.com> Message-ID: <001901ca5686$8cbbba40$a6332ec0$@net> I use a saber saw with a funny little blade that has no teeth on it. Instead it has this coating of somethink like tungsten carbide or the like. I can't remember what it's used for, ceramic comes to mind. It cut the G10 easily, didn't blow huge clouds of it into the air either and is way safer than using a table saw. A die grinder with a cut off wheel cuts G10 pretty good too but it puts some powder into the air. If your die grinder has a cover over most of the wheel then it works even better. In any case I'd be sure to wear at least a dust mask. No one needs fiberglass dust in their lungs. Then I'd have to listen to another lawsuit commercial on TV. Dave Proffitt -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Moorehead Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 2:29 PM Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 I've had good luck cutting G10 on my table saw with a 7" diamond cement blade. Contractors around here use them for cutting Hardie Plank type house siding. I got one at the local lumber yard for about $10-15. http://www.exchangeablade.com/ Look under "diamond blades" mine is a 7" bronze series "turbo" blade #2118892. I quickly figured out than my carbide cabinet blades would cut G10 just fine, but they wouldn't cut wood very well afterwards. Rod M. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Mon Oct 26 14:53:14 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:53:14 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 Message-ID: I use a metal cutting blade on my band saw. It definitely dulls it, but not so severely that it is useless after a single use. Haven't ever tried ay fancy curves, but fo rstraight cuts, it is fine. I have also used my saber saw with a carbide metal cutting blade as well as an abrasive edged tile blade. Both worked fine. I have cut g10 tubing on my table saw without trouble using a carbide cabinet blade. A dimaond cutonff wheel on a dremel works well for slots. -----Original Message----- From: Krausert, Robert [mailto:robert.krausert at intel.com] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 02:31 PM To: 'Paul Bogdanich', rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 Hello,Let me comment here regarding G10. I own a Ridgid 3624 tablesaw. This is a very nice table and was setup with a carbide wood blade. I rubber cemented G10 to a piece of plywood and ran it through the table saw. About two inches into the cut a tooth hooked the G10 and became close to bringing the blade to zero speed. Before it did, the plywood with G10 snapped and a chunk caught the blade wrong, blew into pieces and sent them flying into me. I have four scars on my stomach area, two are over one inch long. Those pieces cut through my t-shirt and skin like they were tissue paper. All in a brief second. Could have been so much worse. After the saw was turned off, I checked the blade and it was warped by the incident. As for me, I didn't feel anything. Then I noticed the bleeding. G10 over heats blades fast and quick break down the tempering and thus quickly dulling. I'm not sure of the best specs. A good metal blade is costly, because you're going to ruin it. If you were going to, I'll let others suggest. But I'm guessing at least 24 teeth per inch, short teeth. Get a handful of the cheaper blades. That way you feel less bad when you kill them. Plus each dull blade becomes another blast deflector for your GSE gear. A bunch of dull $10 blades feels better than a bunch of $70 dull blades.Just stay safe. For my saw that's a 60 tooth blade at 10K RPM is 10,000 teeth passing by each second. Or "stuff" can happen in as little as 0.0001 seconds. Cheers,Robert -----Original Message-----From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Paul BogdanichSent: Monday, October 26, 2009 12:50 PMTo: rockets at rocketsnw.comSubject: Re: [RocketsNW] cutting G10I know I am probably a neophyte here but I have never had any problem with cutting G-10 using narrow large tooth count carbide blades on a table saw. I use a dedicated blade for the purpose (narrow) and it hasn't gone dull yet. End mills make short work of G-10 also. Lathe tools hate it and the dust is terrible._______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Peter.T.Ekstrom at jci.com Mon Oct 26 15:12:00 2009 From: Peter.T.Ekstrom at jci.com (Peter.T.Ekstrom at jci.com) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:12:00 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 In-Reply-To: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43D227DC@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: I'll add my two cents here.... I'm not a real rocket scientist, but I do play one on TV. I am however a real wood worker with years of experience cutting a myriad of materials. As for cutting G10 on a tablesaw, I do it all the time, but just a "little" bit at a time. Let me explain. For cutting fins, and it doesn't matter the thickness, I use a diamond abrasive blade in a jig saw. Been using the same blade for two years and it's as good today as when new. I mark where I want the finished line to be and cut to within 1/16" of the line, so I end up with something that looks almost like the final fin, just a touch larger. Now I go to the tablesaw and use whats called a "cross-cut table". It's mainly a large plywood box with runners on the bottom that fit in the miter slots of the tablesaw, so the surface can move into and past the blade with no other relative motion. I put the fin on the surface with the edge to be cut lined up with the path of the saw blade and pretty much just shave it down to the final size with a number of minimal cuts. Starting with sheet stock, I can make a set of fins in less than an hour. Beveling the edges takes longer, but it's worth it. I've used this method on G10 from 1/32" to 1/4" thick. Also works very well on aluminum, but thats another story. A word on saw blades. Get the best you can afford. I have dozens of 'Systematic' brand. Cost a bunch, but they can be resharpened time and time again for about $10 each. Good blades have quality materials and quality welds so you are much less likely to chip a tooth or warp the blade. Cheap blades are ONLY good for blast deflectors, target practice or playing catch with people you don't like.... Peter Ekstrom TeamNumb "Krausert, Robert" Paul Bogdanich Sent by: , rockets-bounces at r "rockets at rocketsnw.com" ocketsnw.com cc 10/26/2009 02:32 Subject PM Re: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 Hello, Let me comment here regarding G10. I own a Ridgid 3624 tablesaw. This is a very nice table and was setup with a carbide wood blade. I rubber cemented G10 to a piece of plywood and ran it through the table saw. About two inches into the cut a tooth hooked the G10 and became close to bringing the blade to zero speed. Before it did, the plywood with G10 snapped and a chunk caught the blade wrong, blew into pieces and sent them flying into me. I have four scars on my stomach area, two are over one inch long. Those pieces cut through my t-shirt and skin like they were tissue paper. All in a brief second. Could have been so much worse. After the saw was turned off, I checked the blade and it was warped by the incident. As for me, I didn't feel anything. Then I noticed the bleeding. G10 over heats blades fast and quick break down the tempering and thus quickly dulling. I'm not sure of the best specs. A good metal blade is costly, because you're going to ruin it. If you were going to, I'll let others suggest. But I'm guessing at least 24 teeth per inch, short teeth. Get a handful of the cheaper blades. That way you feel less bad when you kill them. Plus each dull blade becomes another blast deflector for your GSE gear. A bunch of dull $10 blades feels better than a bunch of $70 dull blades. Just stay safe. For my saw that's a 60 tooth blade at 10K RPM is 10,000 teeth passing by each second. Or "stuff" can happen in as little as 0.0001 seconds. Cheers, Robert -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Paul Bogdanich Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 12:50 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 I know I am probably a neophyte here but I have never had any problem with cutting G-10 using narrow large tooth count carbide blades on a table saw. I use a dedicated blade for the purpose (narrow) and it hasn't gone dull yet. End mills make short work of G-10 also. Lathe tools hate it and the dust is terrible. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From bigrockets at verizon.net Mon Oct 26 16:01:42 2009 From: bigrockets at verizon.net (Dave Proffitt) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:01:42 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Dimples In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000301ca5690$49524c10$dbf6e430$@net> Well hush my mouth. I should know better than to comment on anything anymore. Guess I don't know anything. Dave Proffitt From: Scott Berfield [mailto:sb at berfield.com] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 2:49 PM To: Dave Proffitt; OROC List Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples Speaking of bullets: http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/2009/04/01/us-army-team-tests-radical-n ew-dimpled-bullet/ -----Original Message----- From: Dave Proffitt [mailto:bigrockets at verizon.net] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 02:04 AM To: 'OROC List' Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples I think your speaking of boundary layer control Ken? One aircraft in particular, a jet, can't remember the model but it employed boundary layer control and it worked pretty good. The biggest problem with it was there were so many small holes and they kept getting plugged up with dirt. I guess it was a real maintenance nightmare so they gave it up as a bad job. As far as dimpling bullets go, I think we're getting into the realm of Reynolds numbers VS bullet drag here. I've done lots of target shooting. Mostly .30 caliber stuff. The .30 caliber match bullets have some very good sectional density and ballistic coefficients. The 220 grain Sierra Matchking hollow point boat tail seems to me to have a BC of .746 above 2800 fps. Part of this is due the sectional density of a 220 bullet and the rest of it with the velocity. Bullets seem to have a sweet spot they like to operate in for a given design. My .338-.378 will shoot a 300 grain Matchking at its optimal velocity and has a BC of almost.800. Good target bullets are a model of streamlining and aerodynamics. Most don't bleed velocity or energy until they get out past 300 yards or so. It's a wonderment to me that they even stay together at the rotational speed they fly at. The V2 reminds me of a bullet with fins. It has a spire point and a boat tail, just doesn't rotate as fast as a bullet does. As far as the Myth Busters show with the clay on the car, I have a real hard time believeing they put on 800 lbs of it? I missed that part of the show that told how much they put on but it looked like there was only about a 4 inch layer of clay on it. I don't know maybe that much clay would weigh 800 lbs? The car didn't squat much like it had that much extra weight on it however. I'm really surprised it had any affect on mileage at all. Drag increases with the square of velocity if I remember things right, so a car at 60 mph is not generating anywhere near the amount of drag a jet would at 600 mph. There was a deal on muscle cars back in the 60's. Pontiac made a big deal out of it with the GTO, and they even named the motor after it. They called it a Ram air IV. In drag racing, it's not really effective on cars that run just a little over 100 mph. The ram effect doesn't really do much until the car gets into the 100 mph realm. Most super gas cars do good to get 145-150 mph in the quarter much less a 4000 lb Goat that runs 98 mph or maybe 105 mph. There's much more power to be had using a cold air intake than messing around with ram air. I'm off the subject now. Gee how did I manage that? Not hard for me. I found a place in Boring that does graphics work. I have not talked to the owner yet, seems like every time I stop by he's gone somewhere. Last time was close to lunch. I'm gonna ask him if he would do some graphics on one of my rockets, before I clear coat it. How about a Velociraptor on a Velociraptor Brad? Just thinking out loud. Dave Proffitt -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 11:11 PM To: jhadv at pacifier.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples The whole point of dimpling is to induce a consistent and uniform amount of turbulence. This increases the range of a golf ball and allows much more precise control of trajectory and spin. On rockets the closest trick is the use of a turbulence inducing ring near the top of the body tube to induce turbulent boundary layer flow before it happens erratically at a somewhat more aft point. The NAR competition guys used a single layer wrap of Scotch tape. In rockets using nose cone separation, this usually occurs naturally at the NC/BT junction anyway. Experiments have been done using suction through tiny holes on wing surfaces to maintain laminar flow on the surface. I've wondered if that could be done on rocket body tubes using the suction of base drag. It'd take a very smooth tube and a kazillion tiny holes though. +McG+ > "I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he > said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds." > > That is my understanding as well and when I quit I was a 6 handicap. > Taking spin is also another characteristic of a dimpled design that might > not be ideal for this application. From what I have looked at the best > thing that can be done for the performance of our rockets (besides the > fineness ratio) would be the incorporation of near mach nose cones. The > best analogy is not the SR-71 or a sounding rocket but the nose of a > fighter plane. A vehicle that spends most of its time between .6 and 1.6 > Mach and that passes the barrier in both directions very efficiently. > Unless of course you're Mike Fisher in which case you might need more > complex designs depending on the precise application but the problem there > is that for the finer shapes (Von Karmen for example) the fidelity of the > actual nosecone to the design parameters is a large problem. Close does > not work. As in at all. May even hurt. > > > > >> Send Rockets mailing list submissions to >> rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> rockets-request at rocketsnw.com >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> rockets-owner at rocketsnw.com >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of Rockets digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. dimples? (Scott Berfield) >> 2. Re: dimples? (Schurke, Peter) >> 3. Re: dimples? (Hammer) >> 4. Re: dimples? (Bill Munds) >> 5. Re: dimples? (Hammer) >> 6. 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative (David Walp) >> 7. Re: The next 60 Acres launch in November (Hammer) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:57:28 +0000 >> From: "Scott Berfield" >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >> had >> thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >> anyone >> done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >> through >> the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? >> >> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >> be >> welcome. >> >> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >> military >> missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the >> case. >> >> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 >> From: "Schurke, Peter" >> To: "Scott Berfield" , >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B30030D at CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> Have you been watching MythBusters? >> >> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >> guys >> took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a clean >> one >> because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >> >> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the car >> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test (2" >> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >> the >> back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were identical... >> >> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >> smooth >> surface. >> >> Peter Schurke >> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >> Ingraham High School >> 1819 N 135th St. >> Seattle, WA 98133 >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> >> >> >> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >> had >> thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >> anyone >> done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >> through >> the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? >> >> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >> be >> welcome. >> >> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >> military >> missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the >> case. >> >> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:18:39 -0700 >> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: <4AE5150F.7050003 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> SkinzWraps: Shark Skin Improves Mileage >> http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/02/11/skinzwraps-shark-skin-improves-mileage/ >> >> Fastskinz (formerly Sharkskinz) Golf Ball Car Covering Gets Independent >> Testing >> http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/05/19/fastskinz-formerly-sharkskinz-golf-ball- car-covering-gets-independent-testing/ >> >> Fastskinz Test Drive: Can a Golf Ball Covering Improve MPGs? >> http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4316702.html >> >> http://www.fastskinz.com/ >> >> Buy some Fastskinz and put some on yer rocket to see if you notice a >> difference. >> >> Robert >> >> >> Schurke, Peter wrote: >>> Have you been watching MythBusters? >>> >>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >>> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a >>> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >>> >>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the >>> car >>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test >>> (2" >>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >>> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were >>> identical... >>> >>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >>> smooth surface. >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> >>> >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>> improved >>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>> ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>> to >>> be the case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 03:19:33 +0000 >> From: Bill Munds >> To: Peter Schurke , scott berfield >> , >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> >> Peter, >> >> Being a non-TV-reception-household, I didn't see the episode. >> >> Question thou,.....what kind of car was it? >> >> I think maybe why the car got better mileage with the 2" of clay is more >> a >> weight/mass issue than the "dimple effect". Basketball/bowling ball >> distance contest. >> >> Why a dirty car would get "better mileage" is questionable. Why would >> the >> aircraftmanufacturers even buff out the edges of the logo paint if it >> didn't make a HUGE difference in performance? >> >> >> >> >> Bill >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD >> Join me >> >> >> >>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 >>> From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org >>> To: sb at berfield.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> Have you been watching MythBusters? >>> >>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >>> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a >>> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >>> >>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the >>> car >>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test >>> (2" >>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >>> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were >>> identical... >>> >>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >>> smooth surface. >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> >>> >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>> improved >>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>> ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>> to >>> be the case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:21:10 -0700 >> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: <4AE515A6.4070806 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he >> said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds. >> >> Robert >> >> Scott Berfield wrote: >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>> improved >>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>> ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>> to >>> be the case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:34:02 -0700 >> From: "David Walp" >> To: >> Subject: [RocketsNW] 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative >> Message-ID: <001801ca55ed$2a390330$7eab0990$@net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> If you were at Mansfield Saturday, you may have seen the spectacular end >> of >> my son's Mad Cow Mozzie - we learned the hard way it is best if motor >> burns >> just through the nozzle and not both ends at the same time. My son has >> a >> soft spot for the Mozzie, so we are considering building another but >> thinking of doing some upgrades... :-) >> >> >> >> The fins for the Mozzie are large and proportionally really hang out >> there. >> The fins that come with the kit are made of 1/8th inch plywood and were >> warped in our original kit (yes I straightened them with limited >> success). >> I suspect if we get our hands on another kit, the fins are likely to be >> warped given the kit has been discontinued and likely been sitting >> around. >> Our thought is to cut new fins from another material. We think there >> would >> be several issues with thicker plywood, more weight, CG moving more aft >> and >> having to enlarge the size of the pre-sloted openings - came immediately >> to >> us. A better grade 1/8th inch plywood wood be one choice. Based on the >> chatter on this discussion group, we were also thinking of trying G10? >> We >> have not yet used G10. The Mozzie is only a mid power rocket, would G10 >> be >> over kill? Any other suggestions for material? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> _dave_ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 7 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:47:45 -0700 >> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> Message-ID: <4AE51BE1.1010900 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> He specifically said they weren't going to allow any "organized >> activities" on 60 Acres until spring time. The launches we've had so >> far have had no real host or sponsoring club and is an informal get >> together of rocketeers. So...yeah, it's definitely a disorganized >> bunch. >> >> >> >> Robert >> >> Schurke, Peter wrote: >>> So... >>> >>> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be allowed. >>> Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED we >>> can still use the field... >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM >>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>> >>> >>> >>> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on >>> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. >>> >>> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since >>> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring >>> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on >>> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't >>> be able to do so at that time, too. >>> >>> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near >>> Carnation. >>> >>> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field >>> between Monroe and Snohomish. >>> >>> Until then no rocketry in Seattle. >>> >>> Robert >>> >>> >>> >>> Dave Randall wrote: >>> >>>> My suggestion: >>>> >>>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >>>> >>>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >>>> >>>> dave >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the >>>>> county >>>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a >>>>> launch so >>>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>>>> >>>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I >>>>> can >>>>> keep them informed. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> George >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>>>> >>>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>>>> rockets >>>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third >>>>>> Sunday (8th >>>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a >>>>>> call >>>>>> to the >>>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>>>> >>>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>>>> >>>>>> Robert >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> End of Rockets Digest, Vol 21, Issue 99 >> *************************************** >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From raystoner99 at comcast.net Mon Oct 26 16:04:28 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (raystoner99 at comcast.net) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:04:28 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 In-Reply-To: <650819289.774501256597997251.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <21617192.776391256598268523.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> I'll throw in a couple cents too. I cut my fins with a bi-metal jig saw blade. They last quite a while, are cheap and I just throw them away when dull. I cut within an 1/8" of the line. I make a fin template out of 3/4" MDF and use that to draw the lines on the fin. Then I use double sided tape to hold the fin blanks on the template. A router table with a pattern following bit makes all the fins the same...I can go from raw stock to fins in a pretty short time. The template allows me to make duplicates when I inevitably screw up one of the fins during the assembly process. I put the bevel on my fins on the table saw. A couple layers of 3/4" MDF that have been glued together to act as a backer for the fin. Double sided tape and the desired angle on the blade. The setup only takes a couple seconds once you get used to it. I set the fence at 1/2 fin thickness + 2xMDF thickness (really, just by eye). I put the edge of the MDF on the surface of the table saw, tape the fin to it and then run the fin/MDF assembly through the saw. In less than 5 minutes, I have fins that are perfectly beveled. I have a dedicated 60 tooth carbide blade to do the work. When it gets dull, I have it sharpened. Unless you are building LOTS of rockets, I can't see getting the blade sharpened more than once every couple of years. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter T Ekstrom" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 3:12:00 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 I'll add my two cents here.... I'm not a real rocket scientist, but I do play one on TV. I am however a real wood worker with years of experience cutting a myriad of materials. As for cutting G10 on a tablesaw, I do it all the time, but just a "little" bit at a time. Let me explain. For cutting fins, and it doesn't matter the thickness, I use a diamond abrasive blade in a jig saw. Been using the same blade for two years and it's as good today as when new. I mark where I want the finished line to be and cut to within 1/16" of the line, so I end up with something that looks almost like the final fin, just a touch larger. Now I go to the tablesaw and use whats called a "cross-cut table". It's mainly a large plywood box with runners on the bottom that fit in the miter slots of the tablesaw, so the surface can move into and past the blade with no other relative motion. I put the fin on the surface with the edge to be cut lined up with the path of the saw blade and pretty much just shave it down to the final size with a number of minimal cuts. Starting with sheet stock, I can make a set of fins in less than an hour. Beveling the edges takes longer, but it's worth it. I've used this method on G10 from 1/32" to 1/4" thick. Also works very well on aluminum, but thats another story. A word on saw blades. Get the best you can afford. I have dozens of 'Systematic' brand. Cost a bunch, but they can be resharpened time and time again for about $10 each. Good blades have quality materials and quality welds so you are much less likely to chip a tooth or warp the blade. Cheap blades are ONLY good for blast deflectors, target practice or playing catch with people you don't like.... Peter Ekstrom TeamNumb "Krausert, Robert" Paul Bogdanich Sent by: , rockets-bounces at r "rockets at rocketsnw.com" ocketsnw.com cc 10/26/2009 02:32 Subject PM Re: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 Hello, Let me comment here regarding G10. I own a Ridgid 3624 tablesaw. This is a very nice table and was setup with a carbide wood blade. I rubber cemented G10 to a piece of plywood and ran it through the table saw. About two inches into the cut a tooth hooked the G10 and became close to bringing the blade to zero speed. Before it did, the plywood with G10 snapped and a chunk caught the blade wrong, blew into pieces and sent them flying into me. I have four scars on my stomach area, two are over one inch long. Those pieces cut through my t-shirt and skin like they were tissue paper. All in a brief second. Could have been so much worse. After the saw was turned off, I checked the blade and it was warped by the incident. As for me, I didn't feel anything. Then I noticed the bleeding. G10 over heats blades fast and quick break down the tempering and thus quickly dulling. I'm not sure of the best specs. A good metal blade is costly, because you're going to ruin it. If you were going to, I'll let others suggest. But I'm guessing at least 24 teeth per inch, short teeth. Get a handful of the cheaper blades. That way you feel less bad when you kill them. Plus each dull blade becomes another blast deflector for your GSE gear. A bunch of dull $10 blades feels better than a bunch of $70 dull blades. Just stay safe. For my saw that's a 60 tooth blade at 10K RPM is 10,000 teeth passing by each second. Or "stuff" can happen in as little as 0.0001 seconds. Cheers, Robert -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Paul Bogdanich Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 12:50 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 I know I am probably a neophyte here but I have never had any problem with cutting G-10 using narrow large tooth count carbide blades on a table saw. I use a dedicated blade for the purpose (narrow) and it hasn't gone dull yet. End mills make short work of G-10 also. Lathe tools hate it and the dust is terrible. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From dmrandall at gmail.com Mon Oct 26 16:49:39 2009 From: dmrandall at gmail.com (Dave Randall) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:49:39 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] The unorganized, drop-in only Turkey Shoot launch, Sunday, 22NOV09/10:00AM-5:00PM In-Reply-To: <4AE5F80A.6010208@earthlink.net> References: <4AE5F80A.6010208@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <6bc920e40910261649r59fc3e62sc571da6651518373@mail.gmail.com> Thanks for the invite Robert! I'll likely bring down my rocket and warm clothes to the non-event. Some GSE will probably fall out of my launch box and be available for sharing should anyone else happen to show up around the same time. Dave On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Hammer wrote: > I'd like to invite Dave Randall to the Turkey Shoot launch scheduled for > Sunday, 22NOV09 from 10:00AM to 5:00PM at 60 Acres Park. ?This is a > unorganized launch with no host or organizer or coordinated with LWYSA. > ?This is a BYOGSE non-event. ?Barring rain, snow or some other unforeseen > event, happen to be in the area and see Dave out there launching rockets > feel free to drop in and launch a few yourself! > > The field might be wet or muddy so don't forget waterproof footwear. ?Dress > warmly because I am sure it's going to be on the chilly side! > > Robert > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > -- - Dave From cpovercg at rocketmail.com Mon Oct 26 16:53:08 2009 From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com (cpovercg at rocketmail.com) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:53:08 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Dimples In-Reply-To: <000301ca5690$49524c10$dbf6e430$@net> References: <000301ca5690$49524c10$dbf6e430$@net> Message-ID: <208945453-1256601179-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-2072822290-@bda080.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> It should be worth noting that the sited article was written on April Fools day, 2009 perhaps some corroborating info should be found... Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: "Dave Proffitt" Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:01:42 To: OROC List Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples Well hush my mouth. I should know better than to comment on anything anymore. Guess I don't know anything. Dave Proffitt From: Scott Berfield [mailto:sb at berfield.com] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 2:49 PM To: Dave Proffitt; OROC List Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples Speaking of bullets: http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/2009/04/01/us-army-team-tests-radical-n ew-dimpled-bullet/ -----Original Message----- From: Dave Proffitt [mailto:bigrockets at verizon.net] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 02:04 AM To: 'OROC List' Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples I think your speaking of boundary layer control Ken? One aircraft in particular, a jet, can't remember the model but it employed boundary layer control and it worked pretty good. The biggest problem with it was there were so many small holes and they kept getting plugged up with dirt. I guess it was a real maintenance nightmare so they gave it up as a bad job. As far as dimpling bullets go, I think we're getting into the realm of Reynolds numbers VS bullet drag here. I've done lots of target shooting. Mostly .30 caliber stuff. The .30 caliber match bullets have some very good sectional density and ballistic coefficients. The 220 grain Sierra Matchking hollow point boat tail seems to me to have a BC of .746 above 2800 fps. Part of this is due the sectional density of a 220 bullet and the rest of it with the velocity. Bullets seem to have a sweet spot they like to operate in for a given design. My .338-.378 will shoot a 300 grain Matchking at its optimal velocity and has a BC of almost.800. Good target bullets are a model of streamlining and aerodynamics. Most don't bleed velocity or energy until they get out past 300 yards or so. It's a wonderment to me that they even stay together at the rotational speed they fly at. The V2 reminds me of a bullet with fins. It has a spire point and a boat tail, just doesn't rotate as fast as a bullet does. As far as the Myth Busters show with the clay on the car, I have a real hard time believeing they put on 800 lbs of it? I missed that part of the show that told how much they put on but it looked like there was only about a 4 inch layer of clay on it. I don't know maybe that much clay would weigh 800 lbs? The car didn't squat much like it had that much extra weight on it however. I'm really surprised it had any affect on mileage at all. Drag increases with the square of velocity if I remember things right, so a car at 60 mph is not generating anywhere near the amount of drag a jet would at 600 mph. There was a deal on muscle cars back in the 60's. Pontiac made a big deal out of it with the GTO, and they even named the motor after it. They called it a Ram air IV. In drag racing, it's not really effective on cars that run just a little over 100 mph. The ram effect doesn't really do much until the car gets into the 100 mph realm. Most super gas cars do good to get 145-150 mph in the quarter much less a 4000 lb Goat that runs 98 mph or maybe 105 mph. There's much more power to be had using a cold air intake than messing around with ram air. I'm off the subject now. Gee how did I manage that? Not hard for me. I found a place in Boring that does graphics work. I have not talked to the owner yet, seems like every time I stop by he's gone somewhere. Last time was close to lunch. I'm gonna ask him if he would do some graphics on one of my rockets, before I clear coat it. How about a Velociraptor on a Velociraptor Brad? Just thinking out loud. Dave Proffitt -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 11:11 PM To: jhadv at pacifier.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples The whole point of dimpling is to induce a consistent and uniform amount of turbulence. This increases the range of a golf ball and allows much more precise control of trajectory and spin. On rockets the closest trick is the use of a turbulence inducing ring near the top of the body tube to induce turbulent boundary layer flow before it happens erratically at a somewhat more aft point. The NAR competition guys used a single layer wrap of Scotch tape. In rockets using nose cone separation, this usually occurs naturally at the NC/BT junction anyway. Experiments have been done using suction through tiny holes on wing surfaces to maintain laminar flow on the surface. I've wondered if that could be done on rocket body tubes using the suction of base drag. It'd take a very smooth tube and a kazillion tiny holes though. +McG+ > "I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he > said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds." > > That is my understanding as well and when I quit I was a 6 handicap. > Taking spin is also another characteristic of a dimpled design that might > not be ideal for this application. From what I have looked at the best > thing that can be done for the performance of our rockets (besides the > fineness ratio) would be the incorporation of near mach nose cones. The > best analogy is not the SR-71 or a sounding rocket but the nose of a > fighter plane. A vehicle that spends most of its time between .6 and 1.6 > Mach and that passes the barrier in both directions very efficiently. > Unless of course you're Mike Fisher in which case you might need more > complex designs depending on the precise application but the problem there > is that for the finer shapes (Von Karmen for example) the fidelity of the > actual nosecone to the design parameters is a large problem. Close does > not work. As in at all. May even hurt. > > > > >> Send Rockets mailing list submissions to >> rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> rockets-request at rocketsnw.com >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> rockets-owner at rocketsnw.com >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of Rockets digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. dimples? (Scott Berfield) >> 2. Re: dimples? (Schurke, Peter) >> 3. Re: dimples? (Hammer) >> 4. Re: dimples? (Bill Munds) >> 5. Re: dimples? (Hammer) >> 6. 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative (David Walp) >> 7. Re: The next 60 Acres launch in November (Hammer) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:57:28 +0000 >> From: "Scott Berfield" >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >> had >> thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >> anyone >> done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >> through >> the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? >> >> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >> be >> welcome. >> >> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >> military >> missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the >> case. >> >> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 >> From: "Schurke, Peter" >> To: "Scott Berfield" , >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B30030D at CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> Have you been watching MythBusters? >> >> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >> guys >> took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a clean >> one >> because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >> >> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the car >> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test (2" >> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >> the >> back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were identical... >> >> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >> smooth >> surface. >> >> Peter Schurke >> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >> Ingraham High School >> 1819 N 135th St. >> Seattle, WA 98133 >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> >> >> >> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >> had >> thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >> anyone >> done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >> through >> the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? >> >> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >> be >> welcome. >> >> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >> military >> missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the >> case. >> >> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:18:39 -0700 >> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: <4AE5150F.7050003 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> SkinzWraps: Shark Skin Improves Mileage >> http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/02/11/skinzwraps-shark-skin-improves-mileage/ >> >> Fastskinz (formerly Sharkskinz) Golf Ball Car Covering Gets Independent >> Testing >> http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/05/19/fastskinz-formerly-sharkskinz-golf-ball- car-covering-gets-independent-testing/ >> >> Fastskinz Test Drive: Can a Golf Ball Covering Improve MPGs? >> http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4316702.html >> >> http://www.fastskinz.com/ >> >> Buy some Fastskinz and put some on yer rocket to see if you notice a >> difference. >> >> Robert >> >> >> Schurke, Peter wrote: >>> Have you been watching MythBusters? >>> >>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >>> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a >>> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >>> >>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the >>> car >>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test >>> (2" >>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >>> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were >>> identical... >>> >>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >>> smooth surface. >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> >>> >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>> improved >>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>> ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>> to >>> be the case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 03:19:33 +0000 >> From: Bill Munds >> To: Peter Schurke , scott berfield >> , >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> >> Peter, >> >> Being a non-TV-reception-household, I didn't see the episode. >> >> Question thou,.....what kind of car was it? >> >> I think maybe why the car got better mileage with the 2" of clay is more >> a >> weight/mass issue than the "dimple effect". Basketball/bowling ball >> distance contest. >> >> Why a dirty car would get "better mileage" is questionable. Why would >> the >> aircraftmanufacturers even buff out the edges of the logo paint if it >> didn't make a HUGE difference in performance? >> >> >> >> >> Bill >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD >> Join me >> >> >> >>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 >>> From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org >>> To: sb at berfield.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> Have you been watching MythBusters? >>> >>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >>> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a >>> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >>> >>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the >>> car >>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test >>> (2" >>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >>> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were >>> identical... >>> >>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >>> smooth surface. >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> >>> >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>> improved >>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>> ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>> to >>> be the case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:21:10 -0700 >> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: <4AE515A6.4070806 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he >> said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds. >> >> Robert >> >> Scott Berfield wrote: >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>> improved >>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>> ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>> to >>> be the case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:34:02 -0700 >> From: "David Walp" >> To: >> Subject: [RocketsNW] 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative >> Message-ID: <001801ca55ed$2a390330$7eab0990$@net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> If you were at Mansfield Saturday, you may have seen the spectacular end >> of >> my son's Mad Cow Mozzie - we learned the hard way it is best if motor >> burns >> just through the nozzle and not both ends at the same time. My son has >> a >> soft spot for the Mozzie, so we are considering building another but >> thinking of doing some upgrades... :-) >> >> >> >> The fins for the Mozzie are large and proportionally really hang out >> there. >> The fins that come with the kit are made of 1/8th inch plywood and were >> warped in our original kit (yes I straightened them with limited >> success). >> I suspect if we get our hands on another kit, the fins are likely to be >> warped given the kit has been discontinued and likely been sitting >> around. >> Our thought is to cut new fins from another material. We think there >> would >> be several issues with thicker plywood, more weight, CG moving more aft >> and >> having to enlarge the size of the pre-sloted openings - came immediately >> to >> us. A better grade 1/8th inch plywood wood be one choice. Based on the >> chatter on this discussion group, we were also thinking of trying G10? >> We >> have not yet used G10. The Mozzie is only a mid power rocket, would G10 >> be >> over kill? Any other suggestions for material? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> _dave_ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 7 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:47:45 -0700 >> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >> Message-ID: <4AE51BE1.1010900 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> He specifically said they weren't going to allow any "organized >> activities" on 60 Acres until spring time. The launches we've had so >> far have had no real host or sponsoring club and is an informal get >> together of rocketeers. So...yeah, it's definitely a disorganized >> bunch. >> >> >> >> Robert >> >> Schurke, Peter wrote: >>> So... >>> >>> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be allowed. >>> Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED we >>> can still use the field... >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM >>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>> >>> >>> >>> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch on >>> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. >>> >>> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since >>> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring >>> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on >>> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't >>> be able to do so at that time, too. >>> >>> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near >>> Carnation. >>> >>> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field >>> between Monroe and Snohomish. >>> >>> Until then no rocketry in Seattle. >>> >>> Robert >>> >>> >>> >>> Dave Randall wrote: >>> >>>> My suggestion: >>>> >>>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >>>> >>>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >>>> >>>> dave >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the >>>>> county >>>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a >>>>> launch so >>>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>>>> >>>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so I >>>>> can >>>>> keep them informed. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> George >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>>>> >>>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>>>> rockets >>>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third >>>>>> Sunday (8th >>>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a >>>>>> call >>>>>> to the >>>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>>>> >>>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>>>> >>>>>> Robert >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> End of Rockets Digest, Vol 21, Issue 99 >> *************************************** >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From cpovercg at rocketmail.com Mon Oct 26 17:00:57 2009 From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com (Robert Braibish) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:00:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 In-Reply-To: <21617192.776391256598268523.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> References: <21617192.776391256598268523.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <891024.28685.qm@web112903.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> I have found cutting G10 with a dimpled blade is far more efficient then cutting it with 2" of clay..... From daron at daronjohnson.com Mon Oct 26 15:01:43 2009 From: daron at daronjohnson.com (Daron Johnson) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:01:43 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Pictures and Videos from the Mansfield Launch Message-ID: <007001ca5687$e8fe3cf0$bafab6d0$@com> Overall a good weekend for me. Five flights and five good recoveries. The Cali Kid got hung in the power lines but the nice fellow (not) from the local power utility got it down for me. I tried out my new Casio camera which can take video up to 1000fps. To my surprise they turned out pretty good. If one of the videos is of your bird, let me know. http://www.daronjohnson.com/~daronjoh/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=15865 From sb at berfield.com Mon Oct 26 17:42:28 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:42:28 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 Message-ID: <200910270042.n9R0gUXW019170@omr17.networksolutionsemail.com> Ok I needed that laugh. -----Original Message----- From: Robert Braibish Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 5:00 PM To: raystoner99 at comcast.net; Peter T Ekstrom Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 I have found cutting G10 with a dimpled blade is far more efficient then cutting it with 2" of clay..... _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Mon Oct 26 17:42:33 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:42:33 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Dimples Message-ID: <200910270042.n9R0gaSE010224@omr3.networksolutionsemail.com> I was wondering if anyone see that :) -----Original Message----- From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 4:53 PM To: Dave Proffitt ; rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com; RocketsNW Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples It should be worth noting that the sited article was written on April Fools day, 2009 perhaps some corroborating info should be found... Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: "Dave Proffitt" Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:01:42 To: OROC List Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples Well hush my mouth. I should know better than to comment on anything anymore. Guess I don't know anything. Dave Proffitt From: Scott Berfield [mailto:sb at berfield.com] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 2:49 PM To: Dave Proffitt; OROC List Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples Speaking of bullets: http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/2009/04/01/us-army-team-tests-radical-n ew-dimpled-bullet/ -----Original Message----- From: Dave Proffitt [mailto:bigrockets at verizon.net] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 02:04 AM To: 'OROC List' Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples I think your speaking of boundary layer control Ken? One aircraft in particular, a jet, can't remember the model but it employed boundary layer control and it worked pretty good. The biggest problem with it was there were so many small holes and they kept getting plugged up with dirt. I guess it was a real maintenance nightmare so they gave it up as a bad job. As far as dimpling bullets go, I think we're getting into the realm of Reynolds numbers VS bullet drag here. I've done lots of target shooting. Mostly .30 caliber stuff. The .30 caliber match bullets have some very good sectional density and ballistic coefficients. The 220 grain Sierra Matchking hollow point boat tail seems to me to have a BC of .746 above 2800 fps. Part of this is due the sectional density of a 220 bullet and the rest of it with the velocity. Bullets seem to have a sweet spot they like to operate in for a given design. My .338-.378 will shoot a 300 grain Matchking at its optimal velocity and has a BC of almost.800. Good target bullets are a model of streamlining and aerodynamics. Most don't bleed velocity or energy until they get out past 300 yards or so. It's a wonderment to me that they even stay together at the rotational speed they fly at. The V2 reminds me of a bullet with fins. It has a spire point and a boat tail, just doesn't rotate as fast as a bullet does. As far as the Myth Busters show with the clay on the car, I have a real hard time believeing they put on 800 lbs of it? I missed that part of the show that told how much they put on but it looked like there was only about a 4 inch layer of clay on it. I don't know maybe that much clay would weigh 800 lbs? The car didn't squat much like it had that much extra weight on it however. I'm really surprised it had any affect on mileage at all. Drag increases with the square of velocity if I remember things right, so a car at 60 mph is not generating anywhere near the amount of drag a jet would at 600 mph. There was a deal on muscle cars back in the 60's. Pontiac made a big deal out of it with the GTO, and they even named the motor after it. They called it a Ram air IV. In drag racing, it's not really effective on cars that run just a little over 100 mph. The ram effect doesn't really do much until the car gets into the 100 mph realm. Most super gas cars do good to get 145-150 mph in the quarter much less a 4000 lb Goat that runs 98 mph or maybe 105 mph. There's much more power to be had using a cold air intake than messing around with ram air. I'm off the subject now. Gee how did I manage that? Not hard for me. I found a place in Boring that does graphics work. I have not talked to the owner yet, seems like every time I stop by he's gone somewhere. Last time was close to lunch. I'm gonna ask him if he would do some graphics on one of my rockets, before I clear coat it. How about a Velociraptor on a Velociraptor Brad? Just thinking out loud. Dave Proffitt -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 11:11 PM To: jhadv at pacifier.com Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples The whole point of dimpling is to induce a consistent and uniform amount of turbulence. This increases the range of a golf ball and allows much more precise control of trajectory and spin. On rockets the closest trick is the use of a turbulence inducing ring near the top of the body tube to induce turbulent boundary layer flow before it happens erratically at a somewhat more aft point. The NAR competition guys used a single layer wrap of Scotch tape. In rockets using nose cone separation, this usually occurs naturally at the NC/BT junction anyway. Experiments have been done using suction through tiny holes on wing surfaces to maintain laminar flow on the surface. I've wondered if that could be done on rocket body tubes using the suction of base drag. It'd take a very smooth tube and a kazillion tiny holes though. +McG+ > "I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he > said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds." > > That is my understanding as well and when I quit I was a 6 handicap. > Taking spin is also another characteristic of a dimpled design that might > not be ideal for this application. From what I have looked at the best > thing that can be done for the performance of our rockets (besides the > fineness ratio) would be the incorporation of near mach nose cones. The > best analogy is not the SR-71 or a sounding rocket but the nose of a > fighter plane. A vehicle that spends most of its time between .6 and 1.6 > Mach and that passes the barrier in both directions very efficiently. > Unless of course you're Mike Fisher in which case you might need more > complex designs depending on the precise application but the problem there > is that for the finer shapes (Von Karmen for example) the fidelity of the > actual nosecone to the design parameters is a large problem. Close does > not work. As in at all. May even hurt. > > > > >> Send Rockets mailing list submissions to >> rockets at rocketsnw.com >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> rockets-request at rocketsnw.com >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> rockets-owner at rocketsnw.com >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of Rockets digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. dimples? (Scott Berfield) >> 2. Re: dimples? (Schurke, Peter) >> 3. Re: dimples? (Hammer) >> 4. Re: dimples? (Bill Munds) >> 5. Re: dimples? (Hammer) >> 6. 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative (David Walp) >> 7. Re: The next 60 Acres launch in November (Hammer) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:57:28 +0000 >> From: "Scott Berfield" >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >> had >> thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >> anyone >> done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >> through >> the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? >> >> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >> be >> welcome. >> >> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >> military >> missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the >> case. >> >> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 >> From: "Schurke, Peter" >> To: "Scott Berfield" , >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B30030D at CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> Have you been watching MythBusters? >> >> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >> guys >> took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a clean >> one >> because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >> >> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the car >> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test (2" >> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >> the >> back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were identical... >> >> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >> smooth >> surface. >> >> Peter Schurke >> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >> Ingraham High School >> 1819 N 135th St. >> Seattle, WA 98133 >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> >> >> >> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >> had >> thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >> anyone >> done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >> through >> the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? >> >> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >> be >> welcome. >> >> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >> military >> missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the >> case. >> >> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:18:39 -0700 >> From: Hammer >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: <4AE5150F.7050003 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> SkinzWraps: Shark Skin Improves Mileage >> http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/02/11/skinzwraps-shark-skin-improves-mileage/ >> >> Fastskinz (formerly Sharkskinz) Golf Ball Car Covering Gets Independent >> Testing >> http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/05/19/fastskinz-formerly-sharkskinz-golf-ball- car-covering-gets-independent-testing/ >> >> Fastskinz Test Drive: Can a Golf Ball Covering Improve MPGs? >> http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4316702.html >> >> http://www.fastskinz.com/ >> >> Buy some Fastskinz and put some on yer rocket to see if you notice a >> difference. >> >> Robert >> >> >> Schurke, Peter wrote: >>> Have you been watching MythBusters? >>> >>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >>> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a >>> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >>> >>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the >>> car >>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test >>> (2" >>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >>> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were >>> identical... >>> >>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >>> smooth surface. >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> >>> >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>> improved >>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>> ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>> to >>> be the case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 03:19:33 +0000 >> From: Bill Munds >> To: Peter Schurke , scott berfield >> , >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> >> Peter, >> >> Being a non-TV-reception-household, I didn't see the episode. >> >> Question thou,.....what kind of car was it? >> >> I think maybe why the car got better mileage with the 2" of clay is more >> a >> weight/mass issue than the "dimple effect". Basketball/bowling ball >> distance contest. >> >> Why a dirty car would get "better mileage" is questionable. Why would >> the >> aircraftmanufacturers even buff out the edges of the logo paint if it >> didn't make a HUGE difference in performance? >> >> >> >> >> Bill >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD >> Join me >> >> >> >>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 >>> From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org >>> To: sb at berfield.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> Have you been watching MythBusters? >>> >>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >>> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a >>> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >>> >>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the >>> car >>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test >>> (2" >>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >>> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were >>> identical... >>> >>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >>> smooth surface. >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> >>> >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>> improved >>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>> ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>> to >>> be the case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without [The entire original message is not included] From Mfreptiles at aol.com Mon Oct 26 18:31:17 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:31:17 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] cutting G10 Message-ID: FWIW, Scott Ulrey from BSD Rocketry got a severe hand injury and eventual amputation of a finger from cutting G-10 on a table saw. Stay safe out there. Mike F. In a message dated 10/26/2009 2:32:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, robert.krausert at intel.com writes: About two inches into the cut a tooth hooked the G10 and became close to bringing the blade to zero speed. Before it did, the plywood with G10 snapped and a chunk caught the blade wrong, blew into pieces and sent them flying into me. I have four scars on my stomach area, two are over one inch long. Those pieces cut through my t-shirt and skin like they were tissue paper. All in a brief second. Could have been so much worse. After the saw was turned off, I checked the blade and it was warped by the incident. As for me, I didn't feel anything. Then I noticed the bleeding. From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Mon Oct 26 19:28:09 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:28:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November In-Reply-To: <4AE58F7A.50803@earthlink.net> References: <4ADD17A5.4040505@earthlink.net><5AE9D783FC4D4593AC9CFC34EBE99F8E@LittleGoodBox><6bc920e40910211932o5aa0895ud66bfcab832de2cd@mail.gmail.com><4AE46945.6000902@earthlink.net><844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B300308@CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> <99FF820DB9D84D2DB61F17CB68E3CDDF@LittleGoodBox> <97A36AC359BA4A798B00FF91BCE80357@LaptopKrausert> <4AE58F7A.50803@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <5c9c14e78d0b9e0ed427a58ff4dd6732.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Like I said, if it's just been reseeded play nice and keep the heck off the delicate new grass. But turf that's well established, that can take quite a beating. Nature designed it that way. Ever look at those picturesque scenes in Europe? The old castle, boulders scattered around, nice short lush green grass everywhere? That's because they pasture sheep there who do their level best to eat the grass into oblivion and stomp all over the turf with their sharp little hooves. Of course you can overgraze but my point is, grass loves to be challenged to grow back bigger, better, faster. A few rocketeers occasionally walking around are in no way going to harm those established soccer fields, even in winter when the ground is wet. Heck, the closest thing to lawn that I have are the areas where I walk all the time and scalp mercilessly down during summer with my weedwhacker. Almost looks like golf greens. LWYSA is not being very reasonable. I'm glad I don't have to go to 60 acres to launch rockets. +McG+ > Here is a good pic of 60 Acres from the air. > http://www.crossfiresoccer.org/fields/index_E.html > > It's the south field where they have been doing the dirt work. > > Robert > > kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com wrote: >> Yep, as a very small time hay farmer and seemingly professional >> cultivator >> of grass and pigweed in my vegetable garden... >> >> If they've scraped the field down to bare dirt and planted new seed then >> yes, it would be best to minimize use over the winter. But if the turf >> is >> rooted in, well heck, I've deliberately pulled out all the rhizomes I >> could find in my garden before winter and still had plenty of grass grow >> back by mid-spring. I gave up on trying to kill off the grass without >> resorting to chemicals. The main footpath here has been worn down to >> mud >> over a winter and returned to green turf by summer. No reason to shoo >> off >> a few rocketeers if the turf is rooted in! >> >> Turf type grass is designed not to die. >> +McG+ >> >> >> >>> Hammer, >>> I'm not one to raise a fuss or rattle cages. I wish you the best with >>> 60A >>> site. But I wonder if the time has come to file a lawsuit against the >>> park >>> district their blated and repeated denial of use. I saw those pictures >>> of >>> the launch with police there enjoying the show. Grass recovery ends in >>> less >>> than a month. The rest of the time, the roots are not growing. So >>> trampling >>> on the grass in the winter makes no difference. As long as they >>> fertilized >>> in the Fall the root system will germinate and grow fine when Spring >>> temps >>> increase and longer day light days. George makes a great point. Show >>> up, >>> fly, and see if any one dares to kick you out. 60A was a mess for you >>> all >>> for years, then it seemed like you had a breakthrough this past year. >>> Someone in the parks committee was sheltered from rockets as a child >>> and >>> you're paying. Soccer is allowed, but you can easily break a bone >>> playing >>> that game. Rocketry is safe if people follow the rules. And that's the >>> whole >>> point of your sanctioned events. Even if it's a no-host event. It's >>> amaizing >>> how people will advise and correct othes. You might want to consider >>> filing >>> a case against them. Just a few things to think about. >>> >>> Wish the best. I say fly anyway. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Robert >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "George Christ" >>> To: "Schurke, Peter" ; "Hammer" >>> ; "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>> >>> Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 4:14 PM >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>> >>> >>> >>>> Agreed. I, for one, have no intention of ceasing to help out Scouts >>>> working on the Space Exploration merit badge and other small-scale >>>> uses >>>> of >>>> 60 Acres for rocketry purposes. Peter, you and your TARC teams should >>>> also >>>> "fly on!" >>>> >>>> Despite the deals between King County Parks and LWYSA, 60 Acres is >>>> still >>>> a >>>> public park, paid for with Forward Thrust funds, and open to all. >>>> >>>> George >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Schurke, Peter" >>>> To: "Hammer" ; "NW Rocketry mailing >>>> list" >>>> Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 3:11 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> So... >>>>> >>>>> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be >>>>> allowed. >>>>> Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED >>>>> we >>>>> can still use the field... >>>>> >>>>> Peter Schurke >>>>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>>>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>>>> Ingraham High School >>>>> 1819 N 135th St. >>>>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer >>>>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM >>>>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >>>>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch >>>>> on >>>>> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. >>>>> >>>>> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since >>>>> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring >>>>> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on >>>>> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we >>>>> won't >>>>> be able to do so at that time, too. >>>>> >>>>> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near >>>>> Carnation. >>>>> >>>>> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field >>>>> between Monroe and Snohomish. >>>>> >>>>> Until then no rocketry in Seattle. >>>>> >>>>> Robert >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dave Randall wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> My suggestion: >>>>>> >>>>>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >>>>>> >>>>>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >>>>>> >>>>>> dave >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the >>>>>>> county >>>>>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a >>>>>>> launch so >>>>>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates >>>>>>> was >>>>>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> can >>>>>>> keep them informed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> George >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>>>>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>>>>>> rockets >>>>>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third >>>>>>>> Sunday >>>>>>>> (8th >>>>>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a >>>>>>>> call >>>>>>>> to the >>>>>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Robert >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Mon Oct 26 19:47:31 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:47:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Dimples In-Reply-To: <4ec17aa3374fe03580832a2bba4a75d3.squirrel@wm.integrity.com> References: <4ec17aa3374fe03580832a2bba4a75d3.squirrel@wm.integrity.com> Message-ID: <0e1254aa6cdb051b78b0bd5a151c8a1d.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Yep, that's a dimpled nose cone all right! It just begs for actual flight comparison with a smooth nose cone on it. It's obviously a low-slow rocket design. +McG+ > Turbulence inducing ring? > > I think I have heard of that being tried at Balls ! > It was a powdered sugar donut "ring" on the nose cone of a rocket with a > "Q" motor. > Not sure if it helped altitude. ;-P > > > > As for a LPR rocket with dimpled nose cone: > https://www.discountrocketry.com/level-1-model-rocket-kits/estes-rockit-stone-flyer-rocket-p-1700.html > > Dustin > > > From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples > > > On rockets the closest trick is the use of a turbulence inducing ring near > the top of the body tube to induce turbulent boundary layer flow before it > happens erratically at a somewhat more aft point. > > > +McG+ > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Mon Oct 26 19:58:09 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:58:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Dimples In-Reply-To: <000601ca561b$638840a0$2a98c1e0$@net> References: <3022.76.115.45.22.1256532440.squirrel@webmail.iinet.com> <382c6c1797a0f79c70d8e2e88b4f104b.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> <000601ca561b$638840a0$2a98c1e0$@net> Message-ID: Yes, boundary layer control. Even if the pinholes worked on a rocket I can easily see it being far more hassle than it'd be worth. It's just my tendency to wander off into weird-ass solutions to simple problems. Laminar flow is the most efficient kind of flow, but since on macroscopic scales turbulence always rears its ugly head, in the 'real world' it's all about controlling and using turbulence, not so much fighting to prevent it. I'm thinking subsonic flight here but you're right Dave that supersonic rockets and bullets have much in common. +McG+ > I think your speaking of boundary layer control Ken? One aircraft in > particular, a jet, can't remember the model but it employed boundary > layer > control and it worked pretty good. The biggest problem with it was there > were so many small holes and they kept getting plugged up with dirt. I > guess > it was a real maintenance nightmare so they gave it up as a bad job. > > As far as dimpling bullets go, I think we're getting into the realm of > Reynolds numbers VS bullet drag here. I've done lots of target shooting. > Mostly .30 caliber stuff. The .30 caliber match bullets have some very > good > sectional density and ballistic coefficients. The 220 grain Sierra > Matchking > hollow point boat tail seems to me to have a BC of .746 above 2800 fps. > Part > of this is due the sectional density of a 220 bullet and the rest of it > with > the velocity. Bullets seem to have a sweet spot they like to operate in > for > a given design. My .338-.378 will shoot a 300 grain Matchking at its > optimal > velocity and has a BC of almost.800. Good target bullets are a model of > streamlining and aerodynamics. Most don't bleed velocity or energy until > they get out past 300 yards or so. It's a wonderment to me that they even > stay together at the rotational speed they fly at. > > The V2 reminds me of a bullet with fins. It has a spire point and a boat > tail, just doesn't rotate as fast as a bullet does. > > As far as the Myth Busters show with the clay on the car, I have a real > hard > time believeing they put on 800 lbs of it? I missed that part of the show > that told how much they put on but it looked like there was only about a 4 > inch layer of clay on it. I don't know maybe that much clay would weigh > 800 > lbs? The car didn't squat much like it had that much extra weight on it > however. > > I'm really surprised it had any affect on mileage at all. Drag increases > with the square of velocity if I remember things right, so a car at 60 mph > is not generating anywhere near the amount of drag a jet would at 600 mph. > There was a deal on muscle cars back in the 60's. Pontiac made a big deal > out of it with the GTO, and they even named the motor after it. They > called > it a Ram air IV. In drag racing, it's not really effective on cars that > run > just a little over 100 mph. The ram effect doesn't really do much until > the > car gets into the 100 mph realm. Most super gas cars do good to get > 145-150 > mph in the quarter much less a 4000 lb Goat that runs 98 mph or maybe 105 > mph. There's much more power to be had using a cold air intake than > messing > around with ram air. I'm off the subject now. Gee how did I manage that? > Not > hard for me. > > I found a place in Boring that does graphics work. I have not talked to > the > owner yet, seems like every time I stop by he's gone somewhere. Last time > was close to lunch. I'm gonna ask him if he would do some graphics on one > of > my rockets, before I clear coat it. How about a Velociraptor on a > Velociraptor Brad? Just thinking out loud. > > Dave Proffitt > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com > Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 11:11 PM > To: jhadv at pacifier.com > Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Dimples > > The whole point of dimpling is to induce a consistent and uniform amount > of turbulence. This increases the range of a golf ball and allows much > more precise control of trajectory and spin. > > On rockets the closest trick is the use of a turbulence inducing ring near > the top of the body tube to induce turbulent boundary layer flow before it > happens erratically at a somewhat more aft point. The NAR competition > guys used a single layer wrap of Scotch tape. In rockets using nose cone > separation, this usually occurs naturally at the NC/BT junction anyway. > > Experiments have been done using suction through tiny holes on wing > surfaces to maintain laminar flow on the surface. I've wondered if that > could be done on rocket body tubes using the suction of base drag. It'd > take a very smooth tube and a kazillion tiny holes though. > > +McG+ > > >> "I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he >> said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds." >> >> That is my understanding as well and when I quit I was a 6 handicap. >> Taking spin is also another characteristic of a dimpled design that >> might >> not be ideal for this application. From what I have looked at the best >> thing that can be done for the performance of our rockets (besides the >> fineness ratio) would be the incorporation of near mach nose cones. The >> best analogy is not the SR-71 or a sounding rocket but the nose of a >> fighter plane. A vehicle that spends most of its time between .6 and >> 1.6 >> Mach and that passes the barrier in both directions very efficiently. >> Unless of course you're Mike Fisher in which case you might need more >> complex designs depending on the precise application but the problem >> there >> is that for the finer shapes (Von Karmen for example) the fidelity of >> the >> actual nosecone to the design parameters is a large problem. Close does >> not work. As in at all. May even hurt. >> >> >> >> >>> Send Rockets mailing list submissions to >>> rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >>> rockets-request at rocketsnw.com >>> >>> You can reach the person managing the list at >>> rockets-owner at rocketsnw.com >>> >>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >>> than "Re: Contents of Rockets digest..." >>> >>> >>> Today's Topics: >>> >>> 1. dimples? (Scott Berfield) >>> 2. Re: dimples? (Schurke, Peter) >>> 3. Re: dimples? (Hammer) >>> 4. Re: dimples? (Bill Munds) >>> 5. Re: dimples? (Hammer) >>> 6. 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative (David Walp) >>> 7. Re: The next 60 Acres launch in November (Hammer) >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Message: 1 >>> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:57:28 +0000 >>> From: "Scott Berfield" >>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> Message-ID: >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >>> >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had >>> thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone >>> done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >>> through >>> the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be >>> welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military >>> missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the >>> case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 2 >>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 >>> From: "Schurke, Peter" >>> To: "Scott Berfield" , >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> Message-ID: >>> > <844C3B8FA4FAED47AE3DAD6CD5EAF6A10B30030D at CNOCEX04.seattleschools.org> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >>> >>> Have you been watching MythBusters? >>> >>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >>> guys >>> took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a clean >>> one >>> because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >>> >>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the >>> car >>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in it, >>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test >>> (2" >>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >>> the >>> back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were identical... >>> >>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in a >>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >>> smooth >>> surface. >>> >>> Peter Schurke >>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>> Ingraham High School >>> 1819 N 135th St. >>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> >>> >>> >>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>> had >>> thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>> anyone >>> done any research on whether rocket performance might be improved >>> through >>> the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf ball? >>> >>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than on >>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>> be >>> welcome. >>> >>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>> military >>> missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear to be the >>> case. >>> >>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket with >>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 3 >>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:18:39 -0700 >>> From: Hammer >>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> Message-ID: <4AE5150F.7050003 at earthlink.net> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >>> >>> SkinzWraps: Shark Skin Improves Mileage >>> > http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/02/11/skinzwraps-shark-skin-improves-mileage/ >>> >>> Fastskinz (formerly Sharkskinz) Golf Ball Car Covering Gets Independent >>> Testing >>> > http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/05/19/fastskinz-formerly-sharkskinz-golf-ball- > car-covering-gets-independent-testing/ >>> >>> Fastskinz Test Drive: Can a Golf Ball Covering Improve MPGs? >>> http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4316702.html >>> >>> http://www.fastskinz.com/ >>> >>> Buy some Fastskinz and put some on yer rocket to see if you notice a >>> difference. >>> >>> Robert >>> >>> >>> Schurke, Peter wrote: >>>> Have you been watching MythBusters? >>>> >>>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >>>> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a >>>> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >>>> >>>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >>>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the >>>> car >>>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in >>>> it, >>>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test >>>> (2" >>>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected >>>> all >>>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >>>> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were >>>> identical... >>>> >>>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in >>>> a >>>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >>>> smooth surface. >>>> >>>> Peter Schurke >>>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>>> Ingraham High School >>>> 1819 N 135th St. >>>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> >>>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >>>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >>>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>>> improved >>>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>>> ball? >>>> >>>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than >>>> on >>>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>>> be welcome. >>>> >>>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>>> to >>>> be the case. >>>> >>>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket >>>> with >>>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 4 >>> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 03:19:33 +0000 >>> From: Bill Munds >>> To: Peter Schurke , scott berfield >>> , >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> Message-ID: >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >>> >>> >>> Peter, >>> >>> Being a non-TV-reception-household, I didn't see the episode. >>> >>> Question thou,.....what kind of car was it? >>> >>> I think maybe why the car got better mileage with the 2" of clay is >>> more >>> a >>> weight/mass issue than the "dimple effect". Basketball/bowling ball >>> distance contest. >>> >>> Why a dirty car would get "better mileage" is questionable. Why would >>> the >>> aircraftmanufacturers even buff out the edges of the logo paint if it >>> didn't make a HUGE difference in performance? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD >>> Join me >>> >>> >>> >>>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:50:49 -0700 >>>> From: pmschurke at seattleschools.org >>>> To: sb at berfield.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>>> >>>> Have you been watching MythBusters? >>>> >>>> For those of you who may have missed it, on last week's episode, the >>>> guys took on the myth that a dirty car gets better gas mileage than a >>>> clean one because of so-called "golf ball dimple effects". >>>> >>>> Short version was that with normal dirt there was no appreciable >>>> difference (in fact it was the wrong way), but when they covered the >>>> car >>>> with a 2" deep layer of modelling clay and put golf ball dimples in >>>> it, >>>> they saw an 11% increase in fuel efficiency over their baseline test >>>> (2" >>>> deep layer of smooth clay). Before anyone says it...they collected all >>>> the bits of clay they dimpled out, put them in a box, and tossed it in >>>> the back seat before they ran their test, so the weights were >>>> identical... >>>> >>>> The dimpling caused a more turbulent flow around the car resulting in >>>> a >>>> smaller drag wake behind it as compared to the laminar flow over a >>>> smooth surface. >>>> >>>> Peter Schurke >>>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>>> Ingraham High School >>>> 1819 N 135th St. >>>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> >>>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Scott Berfield >>>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 5:57 PM >>>> To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>>> improved >>>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>>> ball? >>>> >>>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than >>>> on >>>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>>> be welcome. >>>> >>>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>>> to >>>> be the case. >>>> >>>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket >>>> with >>>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 5 >>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:21:10 -0700 >>> From: Hammer >>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] dimples? >>> Message-ID: <4AE515A6.4070806 at earthlink.net> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >>> >>> I asked a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer about this and he >>> said that the dimpling only works at slow speeds. >>> >>> Robert >>> >>> Scott Berfield wrote: >>>> This is probably somethign already thought aqbout and discarded, but I >>>> had thought about it before and was reminded of it this weekend -- has >>>> anyone done any research on whether rocket performance might be >>>> improved >>>> through the use of a dimpled surface similar to what is used on a golf >>>> ball? >>>> >>>> The one explanation of the effect that I found that seemed most clear >>>> indicated that it is only really useful on blunt objects rather than >>>> on >>>> more streamlined shapes like rockets. But eve a few % efficiency would >>>> be welcome. >>>> >>>> I would assume that if it were effective, we would see it used in >>>> military missiles and shells and even bullets - which does not appear >>>> to >>>> be the case. >>>> >>>> If no on ehas already done so, I am thinking about making a rocket >>>> with >>>> two swappable nose cones - one with and one without dimples -- and see >>>> what the altimeter says for its performance each way. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 6 >>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:34:02 -0700 >>> From: "David Walp" >>> To: >>> Subject: [RocketsNW] 1/8" Plywood Fin Alternative >>> Message-ID: <001801ca55ed$2a390330$7eab0990$@net> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> >>> If you were at Mansfield Saturday, you may have seen the spectacular >>> end >>> of >>> my son's Mad Cow Mozzie - we learned the hard way it is best if motor >>> burns >>> just through the nozzle and not both ends at the same time. My son has >>> a >>> soft spot for the Mozzie, so we are considering building another but >>> thinking of doing some upgrades... :-) >>> >>> >>> >>> The fins for the Mozzie are large and proportionally really hang out >>> there. >>> The fins that come with the kit are made of 1/8th inch plywood and were >>> warped in our original kit (yes I straightened them with limited >>> success). >>> I suspect if we get our hands on another kit, the fins are likely to be >>> warped given the kit has been discontinued and likely been sitting >>> around. >>> Our thought is to cut new fins from another material. We think there >>> would >>> be several issues with thicker plywood, more weight, CG moving more aft >>> and >>> having to enlarge the size of the pre-sloted openings - came >>> immediately >>> to >>> us. A better grade 1/8th inch plywood wood be one choice. Based on >>> the >>> chatter on this discussion group, we were also thinking of trying G10? >>> We >>> have not yet used G10. The Mozzie is only a mid power rocket, would >>> G10 >>> be >>> over kill? Any other suggestions for material? >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> _dave_ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 7 >>> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:47:45 -0700 >>> From: Hammer >>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>> Message-ID: <4AE51BE1.1010900 at earthlink.net> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >>> >>> He specifically said they weren't going to allow any "organized >>> activities" on 60 Acres until spring time. The launches we've had so >>> far have had no real host or sponsoring club and is an informal get >>> together of rocketeers. So...yeah, it's definitely a disorganized >>> bunch. >>> >>> >>> >>> Robert >>> >>> Schurke, Peter wrote: >>>> So... >>>> >>>> If I read your post correctly, no ORGANIZED activities will be >>>> allowed. >>>> Which, by extension means that if we're really, really DISORGANIZED we >>>> can still use the field... >>>> >>>> Peter Schurke >>>> Science and Engineering Teacher, Lead Advisor >>>> Ingraham Aerospace Sciences Academy >>>> Ingraham High School >>>> 1819 N 135th St. >>>> Seattle, WA 98133 >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> >>>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com on behalf of Hammer >>>> Sent: Sun 10/25/2009 8:05 AM >>>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >>>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I talked to Dave Haldeman at the the LWYSA about scheduling a launch >>>> on >>>> 15NOV09. Soccer games have been extended out to that weekend. >>>> >>>> After that no organized activities will be allowed until spring since >>>> the grass needs to grow back during the winter. And when the spring >>>> rolls around there might be a chance we could fly. But based on >>>> everything he said I am sure there will be another excuse why we won't >>>> be able to do so at that time, too. >>>> >>>> Now I see why the SASS guys moved to the field out at Camp Korey near >>>> Carnation. >>>> >>>> I am going to start looking into the possibility of finding a field >>>> between Monroe and Snohomish. >>>> >>>> Until then no rocketry in Seattle. >>>> >>>> Robert >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Dave Randall wrote: >>>> >>>>> My suggestion: >>>>> >>>>> Make it the 15th... Call it the Turkey Shoot. :) >>>>> >>>>> Ok, I'm just borrowing on others' input, but make it so! >>>>> >>>>> dave >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:11 PM, George Christ >>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> There are a couple Cub Scout packs from the southern part of the >>>>>> county >>>>>> (Burien, Federal Way) that have expressed interest in attending a >>>>>> launch so >>>>>> they can fly their models. I asked them which of these two dates was >>>>>> preferable to them and they said the 15th. >>>>>> >>>>>> Once a date is confirmed (15th or otherwise), please let me know so >>>>>> I >>>>>> can >>>>>> keep them informed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>> >>>>>> George >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hammer" >>>>>> >>>>>> To: "NW Rocketry mailing list" >>>>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 6:51 PM >>>>>> Subject: [RocketsNW] The next 60 Acres launch in November >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Soccer season is winding down this month so it's time to get your >>>>>>> rockets >>>>>>> ready to fly in November at 60 Acres Park. The second or third >>>>>>> Sunday (8th >>>>>>> or 15th) is what I am trying to decide right now before I make a >>>>>>> call >>>>>>> to the >>>>>>> LWYSA. Ping me which Sunday works best for you. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And we'll need a name. Any suggestions? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Robert >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Rockets mailing list >>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> End of Rockets Digest, Vol 21, Issue 99 >>> *************************************** >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Tue Oct 27 06:30:26 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 06:30:26 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares 1-X launch this morning Message-ID: <4AE6F5F2.2020009@earthlink.net> http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html It was scheduled for 5:00AM PDT but there have been some delays. The count is still on hold. Tune in to NASA TV to watch. Robert From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Tue Oct 27 06:37:29 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 06:37:29 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares 1-X launch 6:40AM PDT Message-ID: <4AE6F799.7020104@earthlink.net> There is currently a four minute hold with the launch scheduled for 6:40AM. I just heard that the RSO mentioned a cargo ship being in the launch warning/danger area that will take 90 minutes to clear. Robert From greg at blastzone.com Tue Oct 27 06:41:29 2009 From: greg at blastzone.com (Greg Deputy) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 06:41:29 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares 1-X launch 6:40AM PDT In-Reply-To: <4AE6F799.7020104@earthlink.net> References: <4AE6F799.7020104@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <093e01ca570b$30bc8b40$9235a1c0$@com> Thanks for the reminder, tuned in now and watching! Still on the pad... > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On > Behalf Of Hammer > Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 6:37 AM > To: NW Rocketry mailing list > Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares 1-X launch 6:40AM PDT > > There is currently a four minute hold with the launch scheduled for > 6:40AM. I just heard that the RSO mentioned a cargo ship being in the > launch warning/danger area that will take 90 minutes to clear. > > Robert > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From absworld at cet.com Tue Oct 27 06:47:09 2009 From: absworld at cet.com (Bob & Ann Yanecek) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 06:47:09 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares 1-X launch 6:40AM PDT In-Reply-To: <093e01ca570b$30bc8b40$9235a1c0$@com> References: <4AE6F799.7020104@earthlink.net> <093e01ca570b$30bc8b40$9235a1c0$@com> Message-ID: <003601ca570b$fea392b0$fbeab810$@com> It was 'fun' watching them try to get the probe cover pulled off. Kind of like a fishing lure snagged. Final decision, "pull till it breaks"....and it worked! Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Greg Deputy Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 6:41 AM To: 'Hammer'; 'NW Rocketry mailing list' Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares 1-X launch 6:40AM PDT Thanks for the reminder, tuned in now and watching! Still on the pad... > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On > Behalf Of Hammer > Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 6:37 AM > To: NW Rocketry mailing list > Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares 1-X launch 6:40AM PDT > > There is currently a four minute hold with the launch scheduled for > 6:40AM. I just heard that the RSO mentioned a cargo ship being in the > launch warning/danger area that will take 90 minutes to clear. > > Robert > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Tue Oct 27 07:00:58 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:00:58 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares 1-X launch 6:40AM PDT In-Reply-To: <003601ca570b$fea392b0$fbeab810$@com> References: <4AE6F799.7020104@earthlink.net> <093e01ca570b$30bc8b40$9235a1c0$@com> <003601ca570b$fea392b0$fbeab810$@com> Message-ID: <4AE6FD1A.3060809@earthlink.net> There is a current weather hold, also. The launch window will last until 9:00AM PDT. If you want to watch the launch on your Windows Media Player use this link. http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?id=1369080&segment=149773 Robert Bob & Ann Yanecek wrote: > It was 'fun' watching them try to get the probe cover pulled off. > Kind of like a fishing lure snagged. > Final decision, "pull till it breaks"....and it worked! > > Bob Yanecek > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Greg Deputy > Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 6:41 AM > To: 'Hammer'; 'NW Rocketry mailing list' > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares 1-X launch 6:40AM PDT > > Thanks for the reminder, tuned in now and watching! Still on the pad... > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >> > On > >> Behalf Of Hammer >> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 6:37 AM >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares 1-X launch 6:40AM PDT >> >> There is currently a four minute hold with the launch scheduled for >> 6:40AM. I just heard that the RSO mentioned a cargo ship being in the >> launch warning/danger area that will take 90 minutes to clear. >> >> Robert >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Tue Oct 27 08:14:15 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:14:15 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] New Ares 1-X launch time 8:19AM PDT Message-ID: <4AE70E47.6090704@earthlink.net> Weather is still an issue but the count down clock should resume running very shortly. Range status is go. Range weather is green. Robert From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Tue Oct 27 08:18:13 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:18:13 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT In-Reply-To: <4AE70E47.6090704@earthlink.net> References: <4AE70E47.6090704@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <4AE70F35.6030206@earthlink.net> T-0 just got bumped again to 8:24AM due to the winds picking up. Robert Hammer wrote: > Weather is still an issue but the count down clock should resume > running very shortly. Range status is go. Range weather is green. > > Robert > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From daron at daronjohnson.com Tue Oct 27 08:21:22 2009 From: daron at daronjohnson.com (Daron Johnson) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:21:22 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] [personal] Re: New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT In-Reply-To: <4AE70F35.6030206@earthlink.net> References: <4AE70E47.6090704@earthlink.net> <4AE70F35.6030206@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <003901ca5719$25fae900$71f0bb00$@com> They just scrubbed today's launch. :( -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Hammer Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 8:18 AM To: NW Rocketry mailing list Subject: [personal] Re: [RocketsNW] New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT T-0 just got bumped again to 8:24AM due to the winds picking up. Robert Hammer wrote: > Weather is still an issue but the count down clock should resume > running very shortly. Range status is go. Range weather is green. > > Robert > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From greg at blastzone.com Tue Oct 27 08:22:01 2009 From: greg at blastzone.com (Greg Deputy) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:22:01 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT In-Reply-To: <4AE70F35.6030206@earthlink.net> References: <4AE70E47.6090704@earthlink.net> <4AE70F35.6030206@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <09af01ca5719$3be039f0$b3a0add0$@com> Bummer, they just called it for the day. :( > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On > Behalf Of Hammer > Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 8:18 AM > To: NW Rocketry mailing list > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT > > T-0 just got bumped again to 8:24AM due to the winds picking up. > > Robert > > Hammer wrote: > > Weather is still an issue but the count down clock should resume > > running very shortly. Range status is go. Range weather is green. > > > > Robert > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From rocfish74 at hotmail.com Tue Oct 27 08:22:16 2009 From: rocfish74 at hotmail.com (Mark Lyons) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:22:16 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] [personal] Re: New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT In-Reply-To: <003901ca5719$25fae900$71f0bb00$@com> References: <4AE70E47.6090704@earthlink.net> <4AE70F35.6030206@earthlink.net> <003901ca5719$25fae900$71f0bb00$@com> Message-ID: Crap!! > From: daron at daronjohnson.com > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:21:22 -0700 > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] [personal] Re: New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT > > They just scrubbed today's launch. :( > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Hammer > Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 8:18 AM > To: NW Rocketry mailing list > Subject: [personal] Re: [RocketsNW] New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT > > T-0 just got bumped again to 8:24AM due to the winds picking up. > > Robert > > Hammer wrote: > > Weather is still an issue but the count down clock should resume > > running very shortly. Range status is go. Range weather is green. > > > > Robert > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _________________________________________________________________ Windows 7: I wanted more reliable, now it's more reliable. Wow! http://microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/default-ga.aspx?h=myidea?ocid=PID24727::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_myidea:102009 From appusher at q.com Tue Oct 27 08:25:43 2009 From: appusher at q.com (Bill Munds) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:25:43 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] [personal] Re: New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT In-Reply-To: References: <4AE70E47.6090704@earthlink.net> <4AE70F35.6030206@earthlink.net> <003901ca5719$25fae900$71f0bb00$@com> Message-ID: So.......even the BIG BOYS have a recycle. Bummer. Tomorrow maybe. EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD Join me > From: rocfish74 at hotmail.com > To: daron at daronjohnson.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:22:16 -0700 > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] [personal] Re: New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT > > > Crap!! > > > From: daron at daronjohnson.com > > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > > Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:21:22 -0700 > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] [personal] Re: New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT > > > > They just scrubbed today's launch. :( > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > > On Behalf Of Hammer > > Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 8:18 AM > > To: NW Rocketry mailing list > > Subject: [personal] Re: [RocketsNW] New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT > > > > T-0 just got bumped again to 8:24AM due to the winds picking up. > > > > Robert > > > > Hammer wrote: > > > Weather is still an issue but the count down clock should resume > > > running very shortly. Range status is go. Range weather is green. > > > > > > Robert > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Rockets mailing list > > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Windows 7: I wanted more reliable, now it's more reliable. Wow! > http://microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/default-ga.aspx?h=myidea?ocid=PID24727::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_myidea:102009 > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From robert.krausert at intel.com Tue Oct 27 08:30:00 2009 From: robert.krausert at intel.com (Krausert, Robert) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:30:00 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] [personal] Re: New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT In-Reply-To: References: <4AE70E47.6090704@earthlink.net> <4AE70F35.6030206@earthlink.net> <003901ca5719$25fae900$71f0bb00$@com> Message-ID: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43D22C6E@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> The scrub report indicated that the ignitor spit. They didn't bring an extra one to the launch. Cheers, Robert -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Bill Munds Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 8:26 AM To: Mark Lyons; Daron Johnson; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] [personal] Re: New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT So.......even the BIG BOYS have a recycle. Bummer. Tomorrow maybe. EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD Join me > From: rocfish74 at hotmail.com > To: daron at daronjohnson.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:22:16 -0700 > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] [personal] Re: New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT > > > Crap!! > > > From: daron at daronjohnson.com > > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > > Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:21:22 -0700 > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] [personal] Re: New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT > > > > They just scrubbed today's launch. :( > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > > On Behalf Of Hammer > > Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 8:18 AM > > To: NW Rocketry mailing list > > Subject: [personal] Re: [RocketsNW] New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT > > > > T-0 just got bumped again to 8:24AM due to the winds picking up. > > > > Robert > > > > Hammer wrote: > > > Weather is still an issue but the count down clock should resume > > > running very shortly. Range status is go. Range weather is green. > > > > > > Robert > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Rockets mailing list > > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Windows 7: I wanted more reliable, now it's more reliable. Wow! > http://microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/default-ga.aspx?h=myidea?ocid=PID24727::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_myidea:102009 > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Tue Oct 27 08:35:03 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:35:03 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares 1-X scrubbed In-Reply-To: <09af01ca5719$3be039f0$b3a0add0$@com> References: <4AE70E47.6090704@earthlink.net> <4AE70F35.6030206@earthlink.net> <09af01ca5719$3be039f0$b3a0add0$@com> Message-ID: <4AE71327.103@earthlink.net> Came across this press release about Ares. http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.rss.spacewire.html?pid=29011 Ares Needs a Death Panel - Government Must Buy All Rides to Space Commercially Source: http://spacefrontier.org/ In the wake of the Augustine Commission's declaration that the troubled Ares rocket program is unaffordable under any realistic budget projections, the Space Frontier Foundation renewed its call to immediately cancel the costly dead-end project and replace it with multiple commercial vehicles. "Three years ago we published Unaffordable and Unsustainable, declaring that government must henceforth 'buy all crew and cargo services with a destination of low Earth orbit [from] commercial providers using privately-owned and operated spaceships'," said Foundation co-Founder Bob Werb. "For over a decade, we've said that continuing to try and develop new government rockets costs too much and delays human exploration beyond Earth orbit," added co-Founder Rick Tumlinson. "Pouring more money into Ares now is the equivalent of giving a taxpayer-funded I.V. to a corpse. Instead, let's use those funds to give birth to a new and vibrant space transport industry that might actually make money and open the space frontier to everyone." "Derivatives of proven commercial launch systems, and new ones under development, could meet any reasonable need for heavy lift," said Foundation co-Founder, James Muncy. "The barrier is psychological: NASA will have to stop pretending it can design cost-effective launch vehicles and instead focus on exploration systems that fit on the launch vehicles taxpayers can really afford." Werb concluded: "The choice is clear. We can continue funding an overpriced, government space limousine, or we can kick-start a whole new industry that will reduce government's costs and create new jobs. The tools of private sector innovation and competition offer our best and only chance to have affordable and sustainable human space exploration." Space Frontier Foundation William J. Watson Executive Director william.watson at spacefrontier.org 212.729.4363 Greg Deputy wrote: > Bummer, they just called it for the day. :( > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >> > On > >> Behalf Of Hammer >> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 8:18 AM >> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT >> >> T-0 just got bumped again to 8:24AM due to the winds picking up. >> >> Robert >> >> Hammer wrote: >> >>> Weather is still an issue but the count down clock should resume >>> running very shortly. Range status is go. Range weather is green. >>> >>> Robert >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > > > From dmrandall at gmail.com Tue Oct 27 09:33:52 2009 From: dmrandall at gmail.com (Dave Randall) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 09:33:52 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] L2 at Oct Mansfield launch Message-ID: <6bc920e40910270933l5216e3cdo8acee9405795e51@mail.gmail.com> There was an L2 attempt at the October Mansfield launch of an all carbon fiber rocket. I'm not sure if the owner is on the list, but I never heard of an outcome of the flight (other than it was rumored to have failed). If the owner is on the list, can you contact me off-list? Thanks, -- - Dave From faderlk at hotmail.com Tue Oct 27 15:28:33 2009 From: faderlk at hotmail.com (william carpenter) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:28:33 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] WAC October Launch Photos and Video Message-ID: Hello all, I got four good videos and over 70 good photos at the last WAC launch. Here's the link to my Youtube playlist for the launch. http://www.youtube.com/user/simav8r#grid/user/90AD72E14957E11D And here's my photo album. http://travel.webshots.com/album/575254845SlgeLO If you want to be given credit by name for a rocket in a photo or video, then shoot me an e-mail and I'll be happy to do so. Also, please contact me with any information that I may have remembered incorrectly. If you want a copy of a photo of your rocket, send me an e-mail and I'll send you the full-size, high-resolution version. Just be sure to give me credit by name if you use them anywhere. The video files are too large for me to send by e-mail, but I could probably give them to you on a CD or flash drive at the next launch if you really want any of them. Also, feel free to ask about any rockets you don't see in the photo album, as my father took some photos as well. Regards, William Carpenter NAR #88972 _________________________________________________________________ Windows 7: I wanted more reliable, now it's more reliable. Wow! http://microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/default-ga.aspx?h=myidea?ocid=PID24727::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_myidea:102009 From sb at berfield.com Tue Oct 27 15:42:18 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 22:42:18 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Pictures and Videos from the Mansfield Launch Message-ID: Very cool. Thanks for sharing these. -----Original Message----- From: Daron Johnson [mailto:daron at daronjohnson.com] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 03:01 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Pictures and Videos from the Mansfield Launch Overall a good weekend for me. Five flights and five good recoveries. TheCali Kid got hung in the power lines but the nice fellow (not) from thelocal power utility got it down for me.I tried out my new Casio camera which can take video up to 1000fps. To mysurprise they turned out pretty good. If one of the videos is of your bird, let me know. http://www.daronjohnson.com/~daronjoh/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=15865 _______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net Tue Oct 27 21:19:27 2009 From: hammerhatesjunkmail at earthlink.net (Hammer) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:19:27 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares 1-X next launch opportunity, Wednesday, 28NOV09/0500 PDT Message-ID: <4AE7C64F.6090006@earthlink.net> http://www.space-travel.com/reports/Launch_of_new_NASA_rocket_delayed_by_24_hours_999.html Launch of new NASA rocket delayed by 24 hours (excerpt) Weather delays Tuesday forced NASA to postpone by 24 hours the launch of a prototype rocket designed to return astronauts to the Moon, and perhaps one day to Mars. Tuesday, however, proved frustrating for space enthusiasts as first the weather, then a ship at sea, and then clouds conspired to delay the long-awaited launch at Cape Canaveral in Florida. NASA said it would try again in a four-hour window starting at 5:00 am PDT/8:00 am EDT (1200 GMT) Wednesday. "Overall, the weather will improve," a space agency official said. --------------------------- Watch the launch at any of the following links. http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html http://www.fromil.com/tv/index.php?radio=5 http://www.floridatoday.com/content/blogs/space/ http://www.floridatoday.com/content/blogs/space/livenasatv.shtml http://www.floridatoday.com/content/multimedia/space/livenasamediafeed.html http://www.spaceflightnow.com/ares1x/status.html If you want to watch the launch on your Windows Media Player use this link. http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?id=1369080&segment=149773 Other videos: Ares 1-X roll out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfPSymwHo8w (with commentary) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIwgJCWOxOc (without commentary) Ares 1-X's Probe Cover Removal..."PULL!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrtcUmDIbJ4 ARES I-X Time Lapse Lightning Mast Tower Construction http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwVxjqvHihM NASA EDGE @ Ares I-X:Crew Module/Launch Abort System http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPI1XsNAW3k First test flight of the Ares 1 rocket, as envisioned in a NASA CGI video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZfrxUgZSuM (no commentary or narration) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMjjB3ziBfA (with narration) Reuters Video News Article about Ares 1-X launch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MexxBc1FolM Ares I-X Unreleased Inside NASA Footage First Inside Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sFreZLJgAA Ares 1-X SRB already stacked first two segments (with nozzle) moved to VAB http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OBKEGZaygw ARES DROGUE PARACHUTE TEST http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJ0oKhV8f1A Post Ares SRB static test fire news conference (16+ mins.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qcpk_czk03c Ares 1-Y V.2 abort mission scenario http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1Dt4YvQwTM The Flame Trench's Space Web Cams http://www.floridatoday.com/content/maps/spacewebcams.shtml ISS live feed http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/isslivestream.asx From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Tue Oct 27 22:27:11 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 22:27:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares 1-X scrubbed In-Reply-To: <4AE71327.103@earthlink.net> References: <4AE70E47.6090704@earthlink.net> <4AE70F35.6030206@earthlink.net> <09af01ca5719$3be039f0$b3a0add0$@com> <4AE71327.103@earthlink.net> Message-ID: I agree with SFF's position. The NASA/Congress/White House triangle is completely dysfunctional. Maximum spending, minimum results, slowest possible pace. +McG+ (Lead, follow, or get run the hell over) > Came across this press release about Ares. > > http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.rss.spacewire.html?pid=29011 > Ares Needs a Death Panel - Government Must Buy All Rides to Space > Commercially > Source: http://spacefrontier.org/ > > In the wake of the Augustine Commission's declaration that the troubled > Ares rocket program is unaffordable under any realistic budget > projections, the Space Frontier Foundation renewed its call to > immediately cancel the costly dead-end project and replace it with > multiple commercial vehicles. "Three years ago we published Unaffordable > and Unsustainable, declaring that government must henceforth 'buy all > crew and cargo services with a destination of low Earth orbit [from] > commercial providers using privately-owned and operated spaceships'," > said Foundation co-Founder Bob Werb. > > "For over a decade, we've said that continuing to try and develop new > government rockets costs too much and delays human exploration beyond > Earth orbit," added co-Founder Rick Tumlinson. "Pouring more money into > Ares now is the equivalent of giving a taxpayer-funded I.V. to a corpse. > Instead, let's use those funds to give birth to a new and vibrant space > transport industry that might actually make money and open the space > frontier to everyone." > > "Derivatives of proven commercial launch systems, and new ones under > development, could meet any reasonable need for heavy lift," said > Foundation co-Founder, James Muncy. "The barrier is psychological: NASA > will have to stop pretending it can design cost-effective launch > vehicles and instead focus on exploration systems that fit on the launch > vehicles taxpayers can really afford." > > Werb concluded: "The choice is clear. We can continue funding an > overpriced, government space limousine, or we can kick-start a whole new > industry that will reduce government's costs and create new jobs. The > tools of private sector innovation and competition offer our best and > only chance to have affordable and sustainable human space exploration." > > > Space Frontier Foundation > William J. Watson > Executive Director > william.watson at spacefrontier.org > 212.729.4363 > > > > Greg Deputy wrote: >> Bummer, they just called it for the day. :( >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com >>> [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >>> >> On >> >>> Behalf Of Hammer >>> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 8:18 AM >>> To: NW Rocketry mailing list >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] New Ares 1-X launch time 8:24AM PDT >>> >>> T-0 just got bumped again to 8:24AM due to the winds picking up. >>> >>> Robert >>> >>> Hammer wrote: >>> >>>> Weather is still an issue but the count down clock should resume >>>> running very shortly. Range status is go. Range weather is green. >>>> >>>> Robert >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Rockets mailing list >>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From greg at blastzone.com Wed Oct 28 08:28:34 2009 From: greg at blastzone.com (greg at blastzone.com) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:28:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Message-ID: <10450afe15b1f2d884b7d87c55e8ee99.squirrel@webmail.blastzone.com> Just started the clock at 4 minutes, and counting. Aiming for a hole in the clouds! From fred at azinger.com Wed Oct 28 08:35:31 2009 From: fred at azinger.com (Fred Azinger) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:35:31 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: <10450afe15b1f2d884b7d87c55e8ee99.squirrel@webmail.blastzone.com> References: <10450afe15b1f2d884b7d87c55e8ee99.squirrel@webmail.blastzone.com> Message-ID: <004901ca57e4$493e4c60$dbbae520$@com> Nice burn, but it looked like HardTail at Balls -- why did the forward section peel back sideways at burnout? Was this the planned flight profile? -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of greg at blastzone.com Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:29 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Just started the clock at 4 minutes, and counting. Aiming for a hole in the clouds! _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From rcdm at outlawnet.com Wed Oct 28 08:36:46 2009 From: rcdm at outlawnet.com (Moorehead) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:36:46 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! References: <10450afe15b1f2d884b7d87c55e8ee99.squirrel@webmail.blastzone.com> Message-ID: <47CD02ED2AA54902ADE827FAEF5E9EC2@DANE> Hope they remembered to arm the electronics! Rod M. ----- Original Message ----- From: greg at blastzone.com To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:28 AM Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Just started the clock at 4 minutes, and counting. Aiming for a hole in the clouds! _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 08:39:06 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:39:06 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: <004901ca57e4$493e4c60$dbbae520$@com> References: <10450afe15b1f2d884b7d87c55e8ee99.squirrel@webmail.blastzone.com> <004901ca57e4$493e4c60$dbbae520$@com> Message-ID: Did I just miss it? Where did you see it? what is the URL? On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Fred Azinger wrote: > Nice burn, but it looked like HardTail at Balls -- why did the forward > section peel back sideways at burnout? > Was this the planned flight profile? > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of greg at blastzone.com > Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:29 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! > > Just started the clock at 4 minutes, and counting. Aiming for a hole in > the clouds! > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From sb at berfield.com Wed Oct 28 08:40:47 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:40:47 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Message-ID: <200910281540.n9SFemXG010784@omr11.networksolutionsemail.com> That was a nice way to start the day. Very pretty boost. And some great on board vid. -----Original Message----- From: greg at blastzone.com Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:28 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Just started the clock at 4 minutes, and counting. Aiming for a hole in the clouds! _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From absworld at cet.com Wed Oct 28 08:43:21 2009 From: absworld at cet.com (Bob & Ann Yanecek) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:43:21 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: <004901ca57e4$493e4c60$dbbae520$@com> References: <10450afe15b1f2d884b7d87c55e8ee99.squirrel@webmail.blastzone.com> <004901ca57e4$493e4c60$dbbae520$@com> Message-ID: <001901ca57e5$61962e80$24c28b80$@com> I saw that sideways move too. Didn't look right to me but everyone on camera is still all smiles. Beats me man. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:36 AM To: greg at blastzone.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Nice burn, but it looked like HardTail at Balls -- why did the forward section peel back sideways at burnout? Was this the planned flight profile? -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of greg at blastzone.com Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:29 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Just started the clock at 4 minutes, and counting. Aiming for a hole in the clouds! _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From glech at aol.com Wed Oct 28 08:48:40 2009 From: glech at aol.com (Gary Lech) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 11:48:40 -0400 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: <001901ca57e5$61962e80$24c28b80$@com> References: <10450afe15b1f2d884b7d87c55e8ee99.squirrel@webmail.blastzone.com><004901ca57e4$493e4c60$dbbae520$@com> <001901ca57e5$61962e80$24c28b80$@com> Message-ID: <8CC25FD413264FD-57E8-DD7@webmail-d063.sysops.aol.com> I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward section turned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but think that NASA didn't want us to see what follows. Hmmmm??? Gary -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wed, Oct 28, 2009 8:43 am Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! I saw that sideways move too. idn't look right to me but everyone on camera is still all smiles. Beats me man. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- rom: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] n Behalf Of Fred Azinger ent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:36 AM o: greg at blastzone.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com ubject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Nice burn, but it looked like HardTail at Balls -- why did the forward ection peel back sideways at burnout? as this the planned flight profile? From ethan.e.jones at boeing.com Wed Oct 28 08:51:39 2009 From: ethan.e.jones at boeing.com (Jones, Ethan E) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:51:39 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: References: <10450afe15b1f2d884b7d87c55e8ee99.squirrel@webmail.blastzone.com><004901ca57e4$493e4c60$dbbae520$@com> Message-ID: <82D0FB84FE34ED4BAECD8B624B01358D41FA898ABC@XCH-NW-08V.nw.nos.boeing.com> http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html On the right hand side select Other Viewing Options, then under Public Channel select Windows Media (Best for Full Screen). -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:39 AM To: Fred Azinger Cc: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Did I just miss it? Where did you see it? what is the URL? On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Fred Azinger wrote: > Nice burn, but it looked like HardTail at Balls -- why did the forward > section peel back sideways at burnout? > Was this the planned flight profile? > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com > [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of greg at blastzone.com > Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:29 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! > > Just started the clock at 4 minutes, and counting. Aiming for a hole > in the clouds! > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From Mfreptiles at aol.com Wed Oct 28 08:52:08 2009 From: Mfreptiles at aol.com (Mfreptiles at aol.com) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 11:52:08 EDT Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Message-ID: Full video is now up that shows what happened. Parts separated and tumbled. No guidance, so that is expected. Although it appears that there was still some tail off thrust going on at sep that pushed the upper section into a spin. Mike F. In a message dated 10/28/2009 8:49:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, glech at aol.com writes: I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward section turned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but think that NASA didn't want us to see what follows. Hmmmm??? Gary From sb at berfield.com Wed Oct 28 08:52:28 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:52:28 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Message-ID: <200910281552.n9SFqT57026788@omr10.networksolutionsemail.com> Not sure but since the upper section was just a mass accurate dummy, I suspect it was essentially what was supposed to happen. But if not, we'll know soon. -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:43 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! I saw that sideways move too. Didn't look right to me but everyone on camera is still all smiles. Beats me man. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Fred Azinger Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:36 AM To: greg at blastzone.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Nice burn, but it looked like HardTail at Balls -- why did the forward section peel back sideways at burnout? Was this the planned flight profile? -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of greg at blastzone.com Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:29 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Just started the clock at 4 minutes, and counting. Aiming for a hole in the clouds! _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From ds at pacificrocketry.com Wed Oct 28 08:56:29 2009 From: ds at pacificrocketry.com (Denny Smith) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:56:29 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: <8CC25FD413264FD-57E8-DD7@webmail-d063.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CC25FD413264FD-57E8-DD7@webmail-d063.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <000f01ca57e7$3907b9f0$ab172dd0$@com> I don't think there are any conspiracy theories at work here. The upper stage was a "dummy", and I'd think they were just looking to separate the sections. If they would have had a motor(s) and guidance onboard the dummy, I'm guessing it would have staged in a manner we would expect. Just my guess... Denny -----Original Message----- From: Gary Lech [mailto:glech at aol.com] Sent: None To: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward section turned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but think that NASA didn't want us to see what follows. Hmmmm??? Gary -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wed, Oct 28, 2009 8:43 am Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! I saw that sideways move too. idn't look right to me but everyone on camera is still all smiles. Beats me man. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- rom: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] n Behalf Of Fred Azinger ent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:36 AM o: greg at blastzone.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com ubject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Nice burn, but it looked like HardTail at Balls -- why did the forward ection peel back sideways at burnout? as this the planned flight profile? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Wed Oct 28 08:58:51 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:58:51 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Message-ID: <200910281558.n9SFwqaa005326@omr6.networksolutionsemail.com> Yea, I'm sure it's a horrible conspiracy. Please. -----Original Message----- From: Gary Lech Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:48 AM To: Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward section turned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but think that NASA didn't want us to see what follows. Hmmmm??? Gary -----Original Message----- From: Bob & Ann Yanecek To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wed, Oct 28, 2009 8:43 am Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! I saw that sideways move too. idn't look right to me but everyone on camera is still all smiles. Beats me man. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- rom: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] n Behalf Of Fred Azinger ent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:36 AM o: greg at blastzone.com; rockets at rocketsnw.com ubject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Nice burn, but it looked like HardTail at Balls -- why did the forward ection peel back sideways at burnout? as this the planned flight profile? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From fred at azinger.com Wed Oct 28 09:03:09 2009 From: fred at azinger.com (Fred Azinger) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:03:09 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <005601ca57e8$2526a800$6f73f800$@com> Looked, and since the video cut out at the same moment, smells like a bad separation to me. Other than a "what-if massive-failure" kind of test, I can't think of any reason to have this separation profile....risked hitting each other and adding confusion to any post-mortem structural analysis.... IMHO -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Mfreptiles at aol.com Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:52 AM To: Glech at aol.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Full video is now up that shows what happened. Parts separated and tumbled. No guidance, so that is expected. Although it appears that there was still some tail off thrust going on at sep that pushed the upper section into a spin. Mike F. In a message dated 10/28/2009 8:49:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, glech at aol.com writes: I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward section turned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but think that NASA didn't want us to see what follows. Hmmmm??? Gary _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From glech at aol.com Wed Oct 28 09:16:44 2009 From: glech at aol.com (Gary Lech) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:16:44 -0400 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares rocket tumble In-Reply-To: <005601ca57e8$2526a800$6f73f800$@com> References: <005601ca57e8$2526a800$6f73f800$@com> Message-ID: <8CC26012D1004BD-57E8-1633@webmail-d063.sysops.aol.com> I just looked at the ground based video replay. Silly me, the on board video cutting out is probably due to loss of signal due to the antenna orientation. I'm with you Fred. It's still curious that they would just let the payload section tumble after separation. Cheers from ~ Gary Lech -----Original Message----- From: Fred Azinger To: Mfreptiles at aol.com; Glech at aol.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Wed, Oct 28, 2009 9:03 am Subject: RE: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Looked, and since the video cut out at the same moment, smells like a bad eparation to me. ther than a "what-if massive-failure" kind of test, I can't think of any eason to have this separation profile....risked hitting each other and dding confusion to any post-mortem structural analysis.... MHO -----Original Message----- rom: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] n Behalf Of Mfreptiles at aol.com ent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:52 AM o: Glech at aol.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com ubject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Full video is now up that shows what happened. Parts separated and umbled. No guidance, so that is expected. Although it appears that there as till some tail off thrust going on at sep that pushed the upper section nto a spin. ike F. n a message dated 10/28/2009 8:49:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, lech at aol.com writes: I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward section urned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but think that ASA didn't want us to see what follows. Hmmmm??? Gary From bjarchow at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 09:24:14 2009 From: bjarchow at gmail.com (Brian Jarchow) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:24:14 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: <005601ca57e8$2526a800$6f73f800$@com> References: <005601ca57e8$2526a800$6f73f800$@com> Message-ID: After the launch, Nasa TV showed several repeats of the launch - including views from the onboard cameras. In one, I saw broken views after sep from what appeared to be the upper stage dummy. In another, from the camera on the booster, I briefly saw the upper stage while the booster tumbled. Like Mike said, there appeared to be some thrust at sep and I also think that caused the tumble. And I understand the upper stage dummy did not have guidance or ullage motors to stabilize it after separation. But I don't believe a correct separation was supposed to be part of the test. They wanted to test the booster and monitor vibration during boost, according to what I have read. Brian On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Fred Azinger wrote: > Looked, and since the video cut out at the same moment, smells like a bad > separation to me. > Other than a "what-if massive-failure" kind of test, I can't think of any > reason to have this separation profile....risked hitting each other and > adding confusion to any post-mortem structural analysis.... > IMHO > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Mfreptiles at aol.com > Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:52 AM > To: Glech at aol.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! > > Full video is now up that shows what happened. Parts separated and > tumbled. No guidance, so that is expected. Although it appears that > there > was > still some tail off thrust going on at sep that pushed the upper section > into a spin. > > Mike F. > > > In a message dated 10/28/2009 8:49:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > glech at aol.com writes: > > I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward section > turned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but think that > NASA didn't want us to see what follows. > > Hmmmm??? > > Gary > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 09:29:20 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:29:20 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: References: <005601ca57e8$2526a800$6f73f800$@com> Message-ID: They now say they have a good recovery deployment and splash down of both sections and are calling it a perfect flight. I do believe Mike F. has hit it right on the nose. There was some booster activity even after the separation which very well would have caused the tumble. Keep in mind this was just a test of the main booster stage, separation, and recovery. On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Brian Jarchow wrote: > After the launch, Nasa TV showed several repeats of the launch - including > views from the onboard cameras. In one, I saw broken views after sep from > what appeared to be the upper stage dummy. In another, from the camera on > the booster, I briefly saw the upper stage while the booster tumbled. > > Like Mike said, there appeared to be some thrust at sep and I also think > that caused the tumble. And I understand the upper stage dummy did not have > guidance or ullage motors to stabilize it after separation. > > But I don't believe a correct separation was supposed to be part of the > test. They wanted to test the booster and monitor vibration during boost, > according to what I have read. > > Brian > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Fred Azinger wrote: > > > Looked, and since the video cut out at the same moment, smells like a bad > > separation to me. > > Other than a "what-if massive-failure" kind of test, I can't think of any > > reason to have this separation profile....risked hitting each other and > > adding confusion to any post-mortem structural analysis.... > > IMHO > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: > rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > > On Behalf Of Mfreptiles at aol.com > > Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:52 AM > > To: Glech at aol.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! > > > > Full video is now up that shows what happened. Parts separated and > > tumbled. No guidance, so that is expected. Although it appears that > > there > > was > > still some tail off thrust going on at sep that pushed the upper section > > into a spin. > > > > Mike F. > > > > > > In a message dated 10/28/2009 8:49:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > glech at aol.com writes: > > > > I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward > section > > turned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but think > that > > NASA didn't want us to see what follows. > > > > Hmmmm??? > > > > Gary > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From fred at azinger.com Wed Oct 28 09:46:29 2009 From: fred at azinger.com (Fred Azinger) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:46:29 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: References: <005601ca57e8$2526a800$6f73f800$@com> Message-ID: <008b01ca57ee$332bec70$9983c550$@com> Has anybody seen any description of the "guidance" events that they executed during the ascent? The Com indicated, as I recall, three events including one at Max-Q. They sounded like some sort of test of maneuverability at various aerodynamic loading levels. Anybody know what they test were? Also -- they indicated chamber pressure was rising to normal levels....anybody seen a pressure curve? -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:29 AM To: Brian Jarchow Cc: NW Rocketry mailing list Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! They now say they have a good recovery deployment and splash down of both sections and are calling it a perfect flight. I do believe Mike F. has hit it right on the nose. There was some booster activity even after the separation which very well would have caused the tumble. Keep in mind this was just a test of the main booster stage, separation, and recovery. On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Brian Jarchow wrote: > After the launch, Nasa TV showed several repeats of the launch - including > views from the onboard cameras. In one, I saw broken views after sep from > what appeared to be the upper stage dummy. In another, from the camera on > the booster, I briefly saw the upper stage while the booster tumbled. > > Like Mike said, there appeared to be some thrust at sep and I also think > that caused the tumble. And I understand the upper stage dummy did not have > guidance or ullage motors to stabilize it after separation. > > But I don't believe a correct separation was supposed to be part of the > test. They wanted to test the booster and monitor vibration during boost, > according to what I have read. > > Brian > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Fred Azinger wrote: > > > Looked, and since the video cut out at the same moment, smells like a bad > > separation to me. > > Other than a "what-if massive-failure" kind of test, I can't think of any > > reason to have this separation profile....risked hitting each other and > > adding confusion to any post-mortem structural analysis.... > > IMHO > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: > rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > > On Behalf Of Mfreptiles at aol.com > > Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:52 AM > > To: Glech at aol.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! > > > > Full video is now up that shows what happened. Parts separated and > > tumbled. No guidance, so that is expected. Although it appears that > > there > > was > > still some tail off thrust going on at sep that pushed the upper section > > into a spin. > > > > Mike F. > > > > > > In a message dated 10/28/2009 8:49:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > glech at aol.com writes: > > > > I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward > section > > turned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but think > that > > NASA didn't want us to see what follows. > > > > Hmmmm??? > > > > Gary > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 09:51:16 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:51:16 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: <008b01ca57ee$332bec70$9983c550$@com> References: <005601ca57e8$2526a800$6f73f800$@com> <008b01ca57ee$332bec70$9983c550$@com> Message-ID: I do know that one of the events they were tracking was roll control. They are trying to control the roll of the vehicle as it makes its ascent. On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Fred Azinger wrote: > Has anybody seen any description of the "guidance" events that they > executed > during the ascent? The Com indicated, as I recall, three events including > one at Max-Q. They sounded like some sort of test of maneuverability at > various aerodynamic loading levels. Anybody know what they test were? > > Also -- they indicated chamber pressure was rising to normal > levels....anybody seen a pressure curve? > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:29 AM > To: Brian Jarchow > Cc: NW Rocketry mailing list > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! > > They now say they have a good recovery deployment and splash down of both > sections and are calling it a perfect flight. I do believe Mike F. has hit > it right on the nose. There was some booster activity even after the > separation which very well would have caused the tumble. Keep in mind this > was just a test of the main booster stage, separation, and recovery. > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Brian Jarchow wrote: > > > After the launch, Nasa TV showed several repeats of the launch - > including > > views from the onboard cameras. In one, I saw broken views after sep from > > what appeared to be the upper stage dummy. In another, from the camera on > > the booster, I briefly saw the upper stage while the booster tumbled. > > > > Like Mike said, there appeared to be some thrust at sep and I also think > > that caused the tumble. And I understand the upper stage dummy did not > have > > guidance or ullage motors to stabilize it after separation. > > > > But I don't believe a correct separation was supposed to be part of the > > test. They wanted to test the booster and monitor vibration during boost, > > according to what I have read. > > > > Brian > > > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Fred Azinger wrote: > > > > > Looked, and since the video cut out at the same moment, smells like a > bad > > > separation to me. > > > Other than a "what-if massive-failure" kind of test, I can't think of > any > > > reason to have this separation profile....risked hitting each other and > > > adding confusion to any post-mortem structural analysis.... > > > IMHO > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: > > rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > > > On Behalf Of Mfreptiles at aol.com > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:52 AM > > > To: Glech at aol.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! > > > > > > Full video is now up that shows what happened. Parts separated and > > > tumbled. No guidance, so that is expected. Although it appears that > > > there > > > was > > > still some tail off thrust going on at sep that pushed the upper > section > > > into a spin. > > > > > > Mike F. > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 10/28/2009 8:49:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > > glech at aol.com writes: > > > > > > I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward > > section > > > turned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but think > > that > > > NASA didn't want us to see what follows. > > > > > > Hmmmm??? > > > > > > Gary > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Rockets mailing list > > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Rockets mailing list > > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > From terry at mooreread.com Wed Oct 28 09:58:04 2009 From: terry at mooreread.com (Terry Moore-Read) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:58:04 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: <008b01ca57ee$332bec70$9983c550$@com> References: <005601ca57e8$2526a800$6f73f800$@com> <008b01ca57ee$332bec70$9983c550$@com> Message-ID: All I've found is "The rocket is beginning a series of four programmed test maneuvers designed to verify the vehicle's flight dynamics and control characteristics." On Oct 28, 2009, at 9:46 AM, Fred Azinger wrote: > Has anybody seen any description of the "guidance" events that they > executed > during the ascent? The Com indicated, as I recall, three events > including > one at Max-Q. They sounded like some sort of test of > maneuverability at > various aerodynamic loading levels. Anybody know what they test were? > > Also -- they indicated chamber pressure was rising to normal > levels....anybody seen a pressure curve? > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets- > bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:29 AM > To: Brian Jarchow > Cc: NW Rocketry mailing list > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! > > They now say they have a good recovery deployment and splash down of > both > sections and are calling it a perfect flight. I do believe Mike F. > has hit > it right on the nose. There was some booster activity even after the > separation which very well would have caused the tumble. Keep in > mind this > was just a test of the main booster stage, separation, and recovery. > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Brian Jarchow > wrote: > >> After the launch, Nasa TV showed several repeats of the launch - >> including >> views from the onboard cameras. In one, I saw broken views after >> sep from >> what appeared to be the upper stage dummy. In another, from the >> camera on >> the booster, I briefly saw the upper stage while the booster tumbled. >> >> Like Mike said, there appeared to be some thrust at sep and I also >> think >> that caused the tumble. And I understand the upper stage dummy did >> not > have >> guidance or ullage motors to stabilize it after separation. >> >> But I don't believe a correct separation was supposed to be part of >> the >> test. They wanted to test the booster and monitor vibration during >> boost, >> according to what I have read. >> >> Brian >> >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Fred Azinger >> wrote: >> >>> Looked, and since the video cut out at the same moment, smells >>> like a > bad >>> separation to me. >>> Other than a "what-if massive-failure" kind of test, I can't think >>> of > any >>> reason to have this separation profile....risked hitting each >>> other and >>> adding confusion to any post-mortem structural analysis.... >>> IMHO >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: >> rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >>> On Behalf Of Mfreptiles at aol.com >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:52 AM >>> To: Glech at aol.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! >>> >>> Full video is now up that shows what happened. Parts separated and >>> tumbled. No guidance, so that is expected. Although it appears >>> that >>> there >>> was >>> still some tail off thrust going on at sep that pushed the upper > section >>> into a spin. >>> >>> Mike F. >>> >>> >>> In a message dated 10/28/2009 8:49:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >>> glech at aol.com writes: >>> >>> I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward >> section >>> turned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but >>> think >> that >>> NASA didn't want us to see what follows. >>> >>> Hmmmm??? >>> >>> Gary >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Lukins & Annis, P.S. NOTICE: This email may contain confidential or privileged material, and is intended solely for use by the above referenced recipient. Any review, copying, printing, disclosure, distri- bution, or any other use, is strictly prohibited. If you are not the recipient, and believe that you have received this in error, please notify the sender and delete the copy you received. Thank You! From terry at mooreread.com Wed Oct 28 09:41:42 2009 From: terry at mooreread.com (Terry Moore-Read) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:41:42 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: References: <005601ca57e8$2526a800$6f73f800$@com> Message-ID: <64D4EEE2-6D8F-4C0D-A2C1-DE83823D7863@mooreread.com> The booster was intended to tumble ... all that was expected of the upper stage was "uncontrolled descent and impact" On Oct 28, 2009, at 9:29 AM, Christopher Guenther wrote: > They now say they have a good recovery deployment and splash down of > both > sections and are calling it a perfect flight. I do believe Mike F. > has hit > it right on the nose. There was some booster activity even after the > separation which very well would have caused the tumble. Keep in > mind this > was just a test of the main booster stage, separation, and recovery. > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Brian Jarchow > wrote: > >> After the launch, Nasa TV showed several repeats of the launch - >> including >> views from the onboard cameras. In one, I saw broken views after >> sep from >> what appeared to be the upper stage dummy. In another, from the >> camera on >> the booster, I briefly saw the upper stage while the booster tumbled. >> >> Like Mike said, there appeared to be some thrust at sep and I also >> think >> that caused the tumble. And I understand the upper stage dummy did >> not have >> guidance or ullage motors to stabilize it after separation. >> >> But I don't believe a correct separation was supposed to be part of >> the >> test. They wanted to test the booster and monitor vibration during >> boost, >> according to what I have read. >> >> Brian >> >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Fred Azinger >> wrote: >> >>> Looked, and since the video cut out at the same moment, smells >>> like a bad >>> separation to me. >>> Other than a "what-if massive-failure" kind of test, I can't think >>> of any >>> reason to have this separation profile....risked hitting each >>> other and >>> adding confusion to any post-mortem structural analysis.... >>> IMHO >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: >> rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >>> On Behalf Of Mfreptiles at aol.com >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:52 AM >>> To: Glech at aol.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! >>> >>> Full video is now up that shows what happened. Parts separated and >>> tumbled. No guidance, so that is expected. Although it appears >>> that >>> there >>> was >>> still some tail off thrust going on at sep that pushed the upper >>> section >>> into a spin. >>> >>> Mike F. >>> >>> >>> In a message dated 10/28/2009 8:49:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >>> glech at aol.com writes: >>> >>> I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward >> section >>> turned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but >>> think >> that >>> NASA didn't want us to see what follows. >>> >>> Hmmmm??? >>> >>> Gary >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Lukins & Annis, P.S. NOTICE: This email may contain confidential or privileged material, and is intended solely for use by the above referenced recipient. Any review, copying, printing, disclosure, distri- bution, or any other use, is strictly prohibited. If you are not the recipient, and believe that you have received this in error, please notify the sender and delete the copy you received. Thank You! From raystoner99 at comcast.net Wed Oct 28 10:05:08 2009 From: raystoner99 at comcast.net (raystoner99 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:05:08 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1306400514.1521891256749508980.JavaMail.root@sz0124a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Did anybody notice the "kick" off the pad? It seemed to me that the rocket rotated toward the tower a bit, then appeared that the control systems kicked in and brought it back. Did I actually see something, or was I just imagining it. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Terry Moore-Read" To: "Fred Azinger" Cc: "NW Rocketry mailing list" Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:58:04 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! All I've found is "The rocket is beginning a series of four programmed test maneuvers designed to verify the vehicle's flight dynamics and control characteristics." On Oct 28, 2009, at 9:46 AM, Fred Azinger wrote: > Has anybody seen any description of the "guidance" events that they > executed > during the ascent? The Com indicated, as I recall, three events > including > one at Max-Q. They sounded like some sort of test of > maneuverability at > various aerodynamic loading levels. Anybody know what they test were? > > Also -- they indicated chamber pressure was rising to normal > levels....anybody seen a pressure curve? > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets- > bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Christopher Guenther > Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:29 AM > To: Brian Jarchow > Cc: NW Rocketry mailing list > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! > > They now say they have a good recovery deployment and splash down of > both > sections and are calling it a perfect flight. I do believe Mike F. > has hit > it right on the nose. There was some booster activity even after the > separation which very well would have caused the tumble. Keep in > mind this > was just a test of the main booster stage, separation, and recovery. > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Brian Jarchow > wrote: > >> After the launch, Nasa TV showed several repeats of the launch - >> including >> views from the onboard cameras. In one, I saw broken views after >> sep from >> what appeared to be the upper stage dummy. In another, from the >> camera on >> the booster, I briefly saw the upper stage while the booster tumbled. >> >> Like Mike said, there appeared to be some thrust at sep and I also >> think >> that caused the tumble. And I understand the upper stage dummy did >> not > have >> guidance or ullage motors to stabilize it after separation. >> >> But I don't believe a correct separation was supposed to be part of >> the >> test. They wanted to test the booster and monitor vibration during >> boost, >> according to what I have read. >> >> Brian >> >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Fred Azinger >> wrote: >> >>> Looked, and since the video cut out at the same moment, smells >>> like a > bad >>> separation to me. >>> Other than a "what-if massive-failure" kind of test, I can't think >>> of > any >>> reason to have this separation profile....risked hitting each >>> other and >>> adding confusion to any post-mortem structural analysis.... >>> IMHO >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: >> rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >>> On Behalf Of Mfreptiles at aol.com >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:52 AM >>> To: Glech at aol.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! >>> >>> Full video is now up that shows what happened. Parts separated and >>> tumbled. No guidance, so that is expected. Although it appears >>> that >>> there >>> was >>> still some tail off thrust going on at sep that pushed the upper > section >>> into a spin. >>> >>> Mike F. >>> >>> >>> In a message dated 10/28/2009 8:49:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >>> glech at aol.com writes: >>> >>> I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward >> section >>> turned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but >>> think >> that >>> NASA didn't want us to see what follows. >>> >>> Hmmmm??? >>> >>> Gary >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rockets mailing list >>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Lukins & Annis, P.S. NOTICE: This email may contain confidential or privileged material, and is intended solely for use by the above referenced recipient. Any review, copying, printing, disclosure, distri- bution, or any other use, is strictly prohibited. If you are not the recipient, and believe that you have received this in error, please notify the sender and delete the copy you received. Thank You! _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From jhadv at pacifier.com Wed Oct 28 10:15:54 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (Paul Bogdanich) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 10:15:54 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20091028101418.00c48d00@mail.iinet.com> Saw the video of the launch. My rockets get to two miles altitude and through Mach 1 way faster than that thing. True I don't have quite the top end...... From sb at berfield.com Wed Oct 28 11:00:53 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:00:53 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Nice shot of the launch Message-ID: Nice pic at http://www.flickr.com/photos/nasahqphoto/4053299954/sizes/l/ Not too detailed, but I like the framing. From steve-c at ix.netcom.com Wed Oct 28 11:33:04 2009 From: steve-c at ix.netcom.com (steve-c at ix.netcom.com) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:33:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! Message-ID: <12169431.1256754784265.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> AND...the booster tumble motors kicked in after separation when they were supposed to - not a blow-down effect. BTW - the upper section is not intended to be recovered - at least that's what the pre-flight simulations indicated. /Steve -----Original Message----- >From: Christopher Guenther >Sent: Oct 28, 2009 12:29 PM >To: Brian Jarchow >Cc: NW Rocketry mailing list >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! > >They now say they have a good recovery deployment and splash down of both >sections and are calling it a perfect flight. I do believe Mike F. has hit >it right on the nose. There was some booster activity even after the >separation which very well would have caused the tumble. Keep in mind this >was just a test of the main booster stage, separation, and recovery. > >On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Brian Jarchow wrote: > >> After the launch, Nasa TV showed several repeats of the launch - including >> views from the onboard cameras. In one, I saw broken views after sep from >> what appeared to be the upper stage dummy. In another, from the camera on >> the booster, I briefly saw the upper stage while the booster tumbled. >> >> Like Mike said, there appeared to be some thrust at sep and I also think >> that caused the tumble. And I understand the upper stage dummy did not have >> guidance or ullage motors to stabilize it after separation. >> >> But I don't believe a correct separation was supposed to be part of the >> test. They wanted to test the booster and monitor vibration during boost, >> according to what I have read. >> >> Brian >> >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Fred Azinger wrote: >> >> > Looked, and since the video cut out at the same moment, smells like a bad >> > separation to me. >> > Other than a "what-if massive-failure" kind of test, I can't think of any >> > reason to have this separation profile....risked hitting each other and >> > adding confusion to any post-mortem structural analysis.... >> > IMHO >> > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: >> rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] >> > On Behalf Of Mfreptiles at aol.com >> > Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:52 AM >> > To: Glech at aol.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! >> > >> > Full video is now up that shows what happened. Parts separated and >> > tumbled. No guidance, so that is expected. Although it appears that >> > there >> > was >> > still some tail off thrust going on at sep that pushed the upper section >> > into a spin. >> > >> > Mike F. >> > >> > >> > In a message dated 10/28/2009 8:49:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >> > glech at aol.com writes: >> > >> > I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward >> section >> > turned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but think >> that >> > NASA didn't want us to see what follows. >> > >> > Hmmmm??? >> > >> > Gary >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Rockets mailing list >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Rockets mailing list >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From mrrominwa at yahoo.com Wed Oct 28 12:47:32 2009 From: mrrominwa at yahoo.com (dave woodard) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:47:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] ARTS 2 altimeter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <534364.8570.qm@web53109.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Puget Sound Propulsion is proud to announce the addition of ARTS2 altimeter to product line those? interested in initial order pricing drop me a email at customer-service at pugetsoundpropulsion.com ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Dave ? ? From cary4 at juno.com Wed Oct 28 14:03:06 2009 From: cary4 at juno.com (Cary A States) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:03:06 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] EXtreme Rocketry Back Issue #84 Is Here Message-ID: <20091028.140306.2392.0.cary4@juno.com> EXtreme Rocketry Back Issue #84 Is Here Hey All, Just a short sentence about the fact that I have received the back issues # 84 of EXTREME ROCKETRY (last issue). I need the people that ordered and have paid in advance to re-contact me again to confirm their address so I can mail them out. I especially need Mr Bill Munds Of Puget Sound Propulsion address. I have the others. There was one person that wanted me to have them 'in hand' before he would purchase. He needs to contact me if still interested. Sorry for the confusion, but I had a e-mail breakdown, when my program had to be reinstalled and lost some info. -Cary- ____________________________________________________________ 2 Minute Consolidation Quote! Free online quote in 2 minutes. No credit check, no obligation! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=b25Cf9pxbfdTRLW-87a_YwAAJ1C1BQDOebirPKIHQRaqOG0-AAQAAAAFAAAAAHtwpz4AAAMlAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABI2kAAAAAA= From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Wed Oct 28 18:38:25 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:38:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Nice shot of the launch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4aa75dd7ac8957314e1c04a9bf7fd826.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> In fond memory of the spirit of our fallen comrade Alex McLaughlin: "White lightning. Yawn." +McG+ > Nice pic at http://www.flickr.com/photos/nasahqphoto/4053299954/sizes/l/ > > Not too detailed, but I like the framing. > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From sb at berfield.com Wed Oct 28 19:48:02 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 02:48:02 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Nice shot of the launch Message-ID: lol -----Original Message----- From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com [mailto:kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 06:38 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Nice shot of the launch In fond memory of the spirit of our fallen comrade Alex McLaughlin:"White lightning. Yawn."+McG+> Nice pic at http://www.flickr.com/photos/nasahqphoto/4053299954/sizes/l/>> Not too detailed, but I like the framing.>>> _______________________________________________> Rockets mailing list> Rockets at rocketsnw.com> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets>>_______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From carl at mousetrap.com Wed Oct 28 21:44:57 2009 From: carl at mousetrap.com (Carl Hamilton) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:44:57 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Album cover recovery Message-ID: I have always enjoyed photographs from Black Rock launches, especially the ones that show the pieces of a rocket perfectly laid out on the playa following a successful recovery. Include the flier in the shot, arms crossed, and it's even better. There was one a few years ago of Alex McLaughlin that would have made a perfect album cover. This past weekend, I attempted to create my own album cover recovery photo. Unfortunately, I wasn't at Black Rock; I was in Mansfield. And instead of a dry lake bed, I had a mostly empty pond. The rocket was laid out like I wanted, but the setting just wasn't the same... http://picasaweb.google.com/carlwhamilton/MansfieldOctober2009?feat=directlink - Carl From greg at bigredbee.com Wed Oct 28 21:50:38 2009 From: greg at bigredbee.com (Greg Clark) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:50:38 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Album cover recovery In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Cool photos Carl! ya -- that was a classic photo -- anyone got a link to that oldie but goodie? Rick -- what about the "patchwork" on the hill at Brothers in October? Did that turn out? -- Greg On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:44 PM, Carl Hamilton wrote: > I have always enjoyed photographs from Black Rock launches, especially the > ones that show the pieces of a rocket perfectly laid out on the playa > following a successful recovery. Include the flier in the shot, arms > crossed, and it's even better. There was one a few years ago of Alex > McLaughlin that would have made a perfect album cover. > > This past weekend, I attempted to create my own album cover recovery photo. > Unfortunately, I wasn't at Black Rock; I was in Mansfield. And instead of a > dry lake bed, I had a mostly empty pond. The rocket was laid out like I > wanted, but the setting just wasn't the same... > > http://picasaweb.google.com/carlwhamilton/MansfieldOctober2009?feat=directlink > > ?- Carl > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From joebevier at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 23:35:07 2009 From: joebevier at gmail.com (Joe Bevier) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:35:07 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! In-Reply-To: <12169431.1256754784265.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <12169431.1256754784265.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <45717540910282335p750e3bf2t325f509a3896debf@mail.gmail.com> That kick off the pad was planned. "The SRB nozzle will be gimbaled at Mission Elapsed Time (MET) 0.1 seconds for the ?fly away? maneuver (designed to pull I-X away from the launch tower). First motion off the MLP is expected at MET 0.2 seconds." See http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2009/10/live-ares-i-x-second-launch-attempt/ -Joe On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 11:33 AM, wrote: > AND...the booster tumble motors kicked in after separation when they were > supposed to - not a blow-down effect. > > BTW - the upper section is not intended to be recovered - at least that's > what the pre-flight simulations indicated. > > /Steve > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Christopher Guenther > >Sent: Oct 28, 2009 12:29 PM > >To: Brian Jarchow > >Cc: NW Rocketry mailing list > >Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! > > > >They now say they have a good recovery deployment and splash down of both > >sections and are calling it a perfect flight. I do believe Mike F. has > hit > >it right on the nose. There was some booster activity even after the > >separation which very well would have caused the tumble. Keep in mind > this > >was just a test of the main booster stage, separation, and recovery. > > > >On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Brian Jarchow > wrote: > > > >> After the launch, Nasa TV showed several repeats of the launch - > including > >> views from the onboard cameras. In one, I saw broken views after sep > from > >> what appeared to be the upper stage dummy. In another, from the camera > on > >> the booster, I briefly saw the upper stage while the booster tumbled. > >> > >> Like Mike said, there appeared to be some thrust at sep and I also think > >> that caused the tumble. And I understand the upper stage dummy did not > have > >> guidance or ullage motors to stabilize it after separation. > >> > >> But I don't believe a correct separation was supposed to be part of the > >> test. They wanted to test the booster and monitor vibration during > boost, > >> according to what I have read. > >> > >> Brian > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Fred Azinger wrote: > >> > >> > Looked, and since the video cut out at the same moment, smells like a > bad > >> > separation to me. > >> > Other than a "what-if massive-failure" kind of test, I can't think of > any > >> > reason to have this separation profile....risked hitting each other > and > >> > adding confusion to any post-mortem structural analysis.... > >> > IMHO > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto: > >> rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > >> > On Behalf Of Mfreptiles at aol.com > >> > Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:52 AM > >> > To: Glech at aol.com; Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Ares clock is moving! > >> > > >> > Full video is now up that shows what happened. Parts separated and > >> > tumbled. No guidance, so that is expected. Although it appears that > >> > there > >> > was > >> > still some tail off thrust going on at sep that pushed the upper > section > >> > into a spin. > >> > > >> > Mike F. > >> > > >> > > >> > In a message dated 10/28/2009 8:49:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > >> > glech at aol.com writes: > >> > > >> > I'd like to know the full story on that as well. When the forward > >> section > >> > turned sideways the video cut out as well. I couldn't help but think > >> that > >> > NASA didn't want us to see what follows. > >> > > >> > Hmmmm??? > >> > > >> > Gary > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Rockets mailing list > >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Rockets mailing list > >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > >> > >_______________________________________________ > >Rockets mailing list > >Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From ryan98391 at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 23:48:17 2009 From: ryan98391 at gmail.com (Ryan Williams) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:48:17 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] How do I send a message to Rockets Request? Message-ID: Every message I send keeps bouncing. From greg at blastzone.com Thu Oct 29 05:40:22 2009 From: greg at blastzone.com (Greg Deputy) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 05:40:22 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] How do I send a message to Rockets Request? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <023701ca5894$fbf32320$f3d96960$@com> Rockets Request? What are you trying to do? If you're trying to change your list settings, visit the url at the bottom of each list message, or http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On > Behalf Of Ryan Williams > Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:48 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] How do I send a message to Rockets Request? > > Every message I send keeps bouncing. > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From absworld at cet.com Thu Oct 29 06:46:08 2009 From: absworld at cet.com (Bob & Ann Yanecek) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 06:46:08 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Album cover recovery In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00f601ca589e$2bccce80$83666b80$@com> YOU are SOOO lucky. I know that landing in a bunch of MuCk doesn't sound like LuCk but any earlier in the season and you'd a really been StUcK. You still could have had a great cover shot IF you would have stood out there with your arms crossed ;-) I always scan those pesky ponds when recovering over thataway in hopes to see some poor previously sunken project. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Carl Hamilton Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:45 PM To: NorthWest Rocketry Subject: [RocketsNW] Album cover recovery I have always enjoyed photographs from Black Rock launches, especially the ones that show the pieces of a rocket perfectly laid out on the playa following a successful recovery. Include the flier in the shot, arms crossed, and it's even better. There was one a few years ago of Alex McLaughlin that would have made a perfect album cover. This past weekend, I attempted to create my own album cover recovery photo. Unfortunately, I wasn't at Black Rock; I was in Mansfield. And instead of a dry lake bed, I had a mostly empty pond. The rocket was laid out like I wanted, but the setting just wasn't the same... http://picasaweb.google.com/carlwhamilton/MansfieldOctober2009?feat=directli nk - Carl _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From clappfamily at comcast.net Thu Oct 29 07:28:48 2009 From: clappfamily at comcast.net (clappfamily at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:28:48 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] Album cover recovery In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <104252748.2051641256826528965.JavaMail.root@sz0014a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> I have that photo somewhere.? I was the one that took it.? It just seemed like such a nateral shot with the team positioned around the recovery lines.? I'll see if I can find it and post it. I was just thinking of those photos last night.? I need to pull them from the camera and see how they came out. Rick ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Clark" To: "Carl Hamilton" Cc: "NorthWest Rocketry" Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:50:38 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Album cover recovery Cool photos Carl! ya -- that was a classic photo -- anyone got a link to that oldie but goodie? Rick -- what about the "patchwork" on the hill at Brothers in October? ?Did that turn out? -- Greg On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:44 PM, Carl Hamilton wrote: > I have always enjoyed photographs from Black Rock launches, especially the > ones that show the pieces of a rocket perfectly laid out on the playa > following a successful recovery. Include the flier in the shot, arms > crossed, and it's even better. There was one a few years ago of Alex > McLaughlin that would have made a perfect album cover. > > This past weekend, I attempted to create my own album cover recovery photo. > Unfortunately, I wasn't at Black Rock; I was in Mansfield. And instead of a > dry lake bed, I had a mostly empty pond. The rocket was laid out like I > wanted, but the setting just wasn't the same... > > http://picasaweb.google.com/carlwhamilton/MansfieldOctober2009?feat=directlink > > ?- Carl > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ?? From carl at mousetrap.com Thu Oct 29 08:28:03 2009 From: carl at mousetrap.com (Carl Hamilton) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:28:03 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Album cover recovery In-Reply-To: <00f601ca589e$2bccce80$83666b80$@com> References: <00f601ca589e$2bccce80$83666b80$@com> Message-ID: On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Bob & Ann Yanecek wrote: > YOU are SOOO lucky. > I know that landing in a bunch of MuCk doesn't sound like LuCk but any > earlier in the season and you'd a really been StUcK. > You still could have had a great cover shot IF you would have stood out > there with your arms crossed ;-) > Yeah, I was lucky to get back to camp relatively clean. The bottom of the pond was extremely mucky. I had to be careful with each step to avoid sinking up to my knee in the black, smelly crud. I kept thinking about those old jungle adventure movies where they find nothing but the guy's hat resting on top of quicksand. To make things worse, in several of the photos you can see some light colored objects in the background. Those are 55-gallon drums, filled with who knows what, that had been dumped in the pond at some point. Those made me think of the ooze from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movies. I keep checking, but I don't appear to have muted into a ninja. Darn. You might notice that one section of the rocket is in a puddle. As luck would have it, that section houses my avionics. The bay was filled with enough water that, by the time I got to it, the ARTS1 wasn't beeping the flight's altitude as expected. When I got back to camp, I cleaned things up, but the altimeter still wouldn't make any noise. When I looked at it the next morning I was surprised to see how much corrosion has appeared overnight. Then I *really* started to wonder what was in those drums... - Carl From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Thu Oct 29 18:51:26 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:51:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Album cover recovery In-Reply-To: References: <00f601ca589e$2bccce80$83666b80$@com> Message-ID: That wasn't the old manure lagoon was it? ;-) I'm familiar with mud like that here on our farm. Quickmud. Every time you pull one boot out, the other one sinks in even deeper. After a few steps when the mud first begins to spill over the top and fill a boot, you realize venturing in with nobody else around wasn't the smartest thing you ever did! No, no need to ask how I know this... Survival tip: Humans will float horizontally on top of mud or quicksand, but not if you thrash around. +McG+ > On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Bob & Ann Yanecek > wrote: > >> YOU are SOOO lucky. >> I know that landing in a bunch of MuCk doesn't sound like LuCk but any >> earlier in the season and you'd a really been StUcK. >> You still could have had a great cover shot IF you would have stood out >> there with your arms crossed ;-) >> > > Yeah, I was lucky to get back to camp relatively clean. The bottom of the > pond was extremely mucky. I had to be careful with each step to avoid > sinking up to my knee in the black, smelly crud. I kept thinking about > those > old jungle adventure movies where they find nothing but the guy's hat > resting on top of quicksand. > > To make things worse, in several of the photos you can see some light > colored objects in the background. Those are 55-gallon drums, filled with > who knows what, that had been dumped in the pond at some point. Those made > me think of the ooze from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movies. I keep > checking, but I don't appear to have muted into a ninja. Darn. > > You might notice that one section of the rocket is in a puddle. As luck > would have it, that section houses my avionics. The bay was filled with > enough water that, by the time I got to it, the ARTS1 wasn't beeping the > flight's altitude as expected. When I got back to camp, I cleaned things > up, > but the altimeter still wouldn't make any noise. When I looked at it the > next morning I was surprised to see how much corrosion has appeared > overnight. Then I *really* started to wonder what was in those drums... > > - Carl > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From ryan98391 at gmail.com Thu Oct 29 22:17:44 2009 From: ryan98391 at gmail.com (Ryan Williams) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:17:44 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] I'm stil trying to send to message to Rockets NW Message-ID: Testing. 1,2,3 From lawndart.robert at gmail.com Thu Oct 29 22:37:39 2009 From: lawndart.robert at gmail.com (Robert Krausert) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:37:39 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] I'm stil trying to send to message to Rockets NW References: Message-ID: <96F958A6F45F41E5A1A2ECBFA702F5F3@LaptopKrausert> Working fine Ryan. 73, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ryan Williams" To: Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 10:17 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] I'm stil trying to send to message to Rockets NW > Testing. 1,2,3 > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From andrewm at hawkfeather.com Thu Oct 29 22:39:42 2009 From: andrewm at hawkfeather.com (Andrew MacMillen) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:39:42 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] I'm stil trying to send to message to Rockets NW In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4AEA7C1E.8000009@hawkfeather.com> No, no, no! 5,4,3,2,1... Ryan Williams wrote: > Testing. 1,2,3 > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 30 00:08:00 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:08:00 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] I'm stil trying to send to message to Rockets NW In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ryan It is working fine the bounce you get is just to notify you that your message was received. If you want to see the list where your post shows up use this url. http://mx1.blastzone.com/pipermail/rockets/ Chris Guenther NAR L2 On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 10:17 PM, Ryan Williams wrote: > Testing. 1,2,3 > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From cpovercg at rocketmail.com Fri Oct 30 00:30:48 2009 From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com (Robert Braibish) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:30:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers Message-ID: <139135.62860.qm@web112912.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> I am tossing some ideas around in my head about launch towers and I have a few questions to ask the electronic geeks among the group.? My ideas center around a launch tower that has the guides on actuators so they can drop away from the rocket once the (pre-calculated) required stable velocity is achieved (my understanding is somewhere between 40 fps & 50 fps for most rockets).? This means I need electronics that can accurately and quickly determine the velocity of a rocket and then trigger the guide release (I am thinking spring loaded electromagnetic release).? Ideas that had come to me are: a linear array of infrared sensors (like the door chimes at your local 7-11) that sent signals to some processor which could determine the speed and then trigger the release. Or, some radar technology with a sensor that sent its signal to a controller.? I even toyed with the idea of "trip lines" of thread that opened (or closed as the case may be) switches that also sent signals to a controller.? My questions are; What is best/most feasible?way to do this?? Would one of you be willing to "hold my hand" as I stumble through my first DIY electronics project? Finally, and perhaps most importantly, has anyone heard of or tried to do something similar or is it even worth it? Robert Braibish From vonrang at yahoo.com Fri Oct 30 03:10:45 2009 From: vonrang at yahoo.com (Sam Grado) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 03:10:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers In-Reply-To: <139135.62860.qm@web112912.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <837178.41445.qm@web52210.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Modifying a chronograph comes to mind. Sam Grado TRA L2 "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! sales at pvconly.com http://www.pvconly.com http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets --- On Fri, 10/30/09, Robert Braibish wrote: From: Robert Braibish Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 2:30 AM I am tossing some ideas around in my head about launch towers and I have a few questions to ask the electronic geeks among the group.? My ideas center around a launch tower that has the guides on actuators so they can drop away from the rocket once the (pre-calculated) required stable velocity is achieved (my understanding is somewhere between 40 fps & 50 fps for most rockets).? This means I need electronics that can accurately and quickly determine the velocity of a rocket and then trigger the guide release (I am thinking spring loaded electromagnetic release).? Ideas that had come to me are: a linear array of infrared sensors (like the door chimes at your local 7-11) that sent signals to some processor which could determine the speed and then trigger the release. Or, some radar technology with a sensor that sent its signal to a controller.? I even toyed with the idea of "trip lines" of thread that opened (or closed as the case may be) switches that also sent signals to a controller.? My questions are; What is best/most feasible?way to do this?? Would one of you be willing to "hold my hand" as I stumble through my first DIY electronics project? Finally, and perhaps most importantly, has anyone heard of or tried to do something similar or is it even worth it? Robert Braibish ? ? ? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets ? From melamy at earthlink.net Fri Oct 30 06:13:00 2009 From: melamy at earthlink.net (melamy at earthlink.net) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 06:13:00 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers Message-ID: <5916745.1256908380192.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> I think I would make the tower height adjustable so the stability is reached just as the tower ends would be easier. You can sense the rocket speed, but can you make an actuator for the rails that will operate in the very low millisecond range? The problem that I see is by the time you can get the guides out of the way, the rocket will already be gone. I don't have rocksim available at the moment, but a high thrust rocket will more than likely only be in launch guides for less than 200ms. You would actually have to start the "removal" of the guides even before the rocket was up to speed in order to get them out of the way. Of note, you would only need to make the upper guides "fall away" rather than needing the entire guide length. The rocket will already be up the tower anyway. The smaller the mechanical area, the lower the inertia will be for the mechanism and the faster it can be moved. For a sensor array, keep in mind that mechanical switches with have response times, so the thread idea is probably not quick enough. Light sensors would be the easist and I would think that you could actually look for the motor burn as you light source and sense that. best regards, Steve Thatcher -----Original Message----- >From: Robert Braibish >Sent: Oct 30, 2009 12:30 AM >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers > >I am tossing some ideas around in my head about launch towers and I have a few questions to ask the electronic geeks among the group.? My ideas center around a launch tower that has the guides on actuators so they can drop away from the rocket once the (pre-calculated) required stable velocity is achieved (my understanding is somewhere between 40 fps & 50 fps for most rockets).? This means I need electronics that can accurately and quickly determine the velocity of a rocket and then trigger the guide release (I am thinking spring loaded electromagnetic release).? Ideas that had come to me are: a linear array of infrared sensors (like the door chimes at your local 7-11) that sent signals to some processor which could determine the speed and then trigger the release. Or, some radar technology with a sensor that sent its signal to a controller.? I even toyed with the idea of "trip lines" of thread that opened (or closed as the case may be) switches that > also sent signals to a controller.? >My questions are; >What is best/most feasible?way to do this?? >Would one of you be willing to "hold my hand" as I stumble through my first DIY electronics project? >Finally, and perhaps most importantly, has anyone heard of or tried to do something similar or is it even worth it? > >Robert Braibish > > > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > From absworld at cet.com Fri Oct 30 06:47:03 2009 From: absworld at cet.com (Bob & Ann Yanecek) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 06:47:03 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers In-Reply-To: <139135.62860.qm@web112912.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <139135.62860.qm@web112912.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <01f701ca5967$77acfe50$6706faf0$@com> Sounds like an interesting project but I'm not sure how 'beneficial' it may be. Once I get over 38mm, my airframes are quite loose in the tower such that there is little/no drag to worry about. I also have both 6' and 10' rails which allow me to 'minimize' the amount of tower needed for any particular project. Still working on a concept to combine both lengths into a 16 footer for a 2 stage project. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Robert Braibish Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 12:31 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers I am tossing some ideas around in my head about launch towers and I have a few questions to ask the electronic geeks among the group.? My ideas center around a launch tower that has the guides on actuators so they can drop away from the rocket once the (pre-calculated) required stable velocity is achieved (my understanding is somewhere between 40 fps & 50 fps for most rockets).? This means I need electronics that can accurately and quickly determine the velocity of a rocket and then trigger the guide release (I am thinking spring loaded electromagnetic release).? Ideas that had come to me are: a linear array of infrared sensors (like the door chimes at your local 7-11) that sent signals to some processor which could determine the speed and then trigger the release. Or, some radar technology with a sensor that sent its signal to a controller.? I even toyed with the idea of "trip lines" of thread that opened (or closed as the case may be) switches that also sent signals to a controller.? My questions are; What is best/most feasible?way to do this?? Would one of you be willing to "hold my hand" as I stumble through my first DIY electronics project? Finally, and perhaps most importantly, has anyone heard of or tried to do something similar or is it even worth it? Robert Braibish _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From steven.e.bloom at boeing.com Fri Oct 30 07:08:25 2009 From: steven.e.bloom at boeing.com (Bloom, Steven E) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 07:08:25 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Album cover recovery In-Reply-To: <104252748.2051641256826528965.JavaMail.root@sz0014a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> References: <104252748.2051641256826528965.JavaMail.root@sz0014a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: moments after..... perfect recovery. http://www.northwestrocketry.com/uploads/steve.JPG -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of clappfamily at comcast.net Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:29 AM To: Greg Clark Cc: NorthWest Rocketry Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Album cover recovery I have that photo somewhere. I was the one that took it. It just seemed like such a nateral shot with the team positioned around the recovery lines. I'll see if I can find it and post it. I was just thinking of those photos last night. I need to pull them from the camera and see how they came out. Rick ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Clark" To: "Carl Hamilton" Cc: "NorthWest Rocketry" Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:50:38 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Album cover recovery Cool photos Carl! ya -- that was a classic photo -- anyone got a link to that oldie but goodie? Rick -- what about the "patchwork" on the hill at Brothers in October? Did that turn out? -- Greg On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:44 PM, Carl Hamilton wrote: > I have always enjoyed photographs from Black Rock launches, especially > the ones that show the pieces of a rocket perfectly laid out on the > playa following a successful recovery. Include the flier in the shot, > arms crossed, and it's even better. There was one a few years ago of > Alex McLaughlin that would have made a perfect album cover. > > This past weekend, I attempted to create my own album cover recovery photo. > Unfortunately, I wasn't at Black Rock; I was in Mansfield. And instead > of a dry lake bed, I had a mostly empty pond. The rocket was laid out > like I wanted, but the setting just wasn't the same... > > http://picasaweb.google.com/carlwhamilton/MansfieldOctober2009?feat=di > rectlink > > - Carl > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From David.A.Davis at boeing.com Fri Oct 30 07:10:03 2009 From: David.A.Davis at boeing.com (Davis, David A) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 07:10:03 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers In-Reply-To: <5916745.1256908380192.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <5916745.1256908380192.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <79B24616543F4E46B037138ECFAE14A44E2FA1C6A4@XCH-NW-02V.nw.nos.boeing.com> Since the plan is to reduce drag, then why not go with a closed breech launch tube with the bird surrounded by a two piece foam sabot. Much simpler design, easy to maintain, more portable, and more adaptable. Take a look at the ARCAS launching system as an example. -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of melamy at earthlink.net Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 6:13 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] launch towers I think I would make the tower height adjustable so the stability is reached just as the tower ends would be easier. You can sense the rocket speed, but can you make an actuator for the rails that will operate in the very low millisecond range? The problem that I see is by the time you can get the guides out of the way, the rocket will already be gone. I don't have rocksim available at the moment, but a high thrust rocket will more than likely only be in launch guides for less than 200ms. You would actually have to start the "removal" of the guides even before the rocket was up to speed in order to get them out of the way. Of note, you would only need to make the upper guides "fall away" rather than needing the entire guide length. The rocket will already be up the tower anyway. The smaller the mechanical area, the lower the inertia will be for the mechanism and the faster it can be moved. For a sensor array, keep in mind that mechanical switches with have response times, so the thread idea is probably not quick enough. Light sensors would be the easist and I would think that you could actually look for the motor burn as you light source and sense that. best regards, Steve Thatcher -----Original Message----- >From: Robert Braibish >Sent: Oct 30, 2009 12:30 AM >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers > >I am tossing some ideas around in my head about launch towers and I >have a few questions to ask the electronic geeks among the group.? My ideas center around a launch tower that has the guides on actuators so they can drop away from the rocket once the (pre-calculated) required stable velocity is achieved (my understanding is somewhere between 40 fps & 50 fps for most rockets).? This means I need electronics that can accurately and quickly determine the velocity of a rocket and then trigger the guide release (I am thinking spring loaded electromagnetic release).? Ideas that had come to me are: a linear array of infrared sensors (like the door chimes at your local 7-11) that sent signals to some processor which could determine the speed and then trigger the release. Or, some radar technology with a sensor that sent its signal to a controller.? I even toyed with the idea of "trip lines" of thread that opened (or closed as the case may be) switches that also sent signals to a controller. >My questions are; >What is best/most feasible?way to do this? Would one of you be willing >to "hold my hand" as I stumble through my first DIY electronics project? >Finally, and perhaps most importantly, has anyone heard of or tried to do something similar or is it even worth it? > >Robert Braibish > > > >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From cpovercg at rocketmail.com Fri Oct 30 08:17:45 2009 From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com (Robert Braibish) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 08:17:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers In-Reply-To: <5916745.1256908380192.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <5916745.1256908380192.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <570418.20210.qm@web112910.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Yes, the sole purpose is to minimize drag.? Both with the removal of any launch hardware on the rocket and by the removal of any unnecessary friction on the rocket at the launch tower.? To be honest I am not going for any altitude records (yet) and this is more of a mental exercise at this point.? I'll also have to admit that I did not pencil out the exact range of speed that things would need to happen at.? I did rationalize though that I am only talking about perhaps 2 inches, and the top of the tower is the only part that needs to move (pivot), I had envisioned a pre-tensioned spring on each guide, which in turn is held in place by an electromagnetic switch. I just figured I could tension a spring enough to move the rail the two inches in less time than the rocket would need?to?move the 2, 3 or?4 feet left on the rails. I have found electromagnets that can hold 50lbs with the power of just one D cell battery and I have seen an amazing demonstration of a table saw with a spring loaded blade that has the ability to sense if a hand - or other body part I reckon -?has come into contact with the blade (with a change in conductivity like the touch-on lamps do) and then pull the blade down and out of the way. It literally moves so fast, that the saw blade does not have the time to cut the individual so I know some?pretty fast speeds can be obtained. I like the Idea of a sabo and of adjusting the rail height, I will definitely look into those ideas further, but I didn't know the speed of the electronics.? I will continue to refine the math and get a better idea of just what kind of speed I am talking about.? Thanks to all for the input so far. Robert Braibish ________________________________ From: "melamy at earthlink.net" To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Sent: Fri, October 30, 2009 6:13:00 AM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] launch towers I think I would make the tower height adjustable so the stability is reached just as the tower ends would be easier. You can sense the rocket speed, but can you make an actuator for the rails that will operate in the very low millisecond range? The problem that I see is by the time you can get the guides out of the way, the rocket will already be gone. I don't have rocksim available at the moment, but a high thrust rocket will more than likely only be in launch guides for less than 200ms. You would actually have to start the "removal" of the guides even before the rocket was up to speed in order to get them out of the way. Of note, you would only need to make the upper guides "fall away" rather than needing the entire guide length. The rocket will already be up the tower anyway. The smaller the mechanical area, the lower the inertia will be for the mechanism and the faster it can be moved. For a sensor array, keep in mind that mechanical switches with have response times, so the thread idea is probably not quick enough. Light sensors would be the easist and I would think that you could actually look for the motor burn as you light source and sense that. best regards, Steve Thatcher -----Original Message----- >From: Robert Braibish >Sent: Oct 30, 2009 12:30 AM >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers > >I am tossing some ideas around in my head about launch towers and I have a few questions to ask the electronic geeks among the group.? My ideas center around a launch tower that has the guides on actuators so they can drop away from the rocket once the (pre-calculated) required stable velocity is achieved (my understanding is somewhere between 40 fps & 50 fps for most rockets).? This means I need electronics that can accurately and quickly determine the velocity of a rocket and then trigger the guide release (I am thinking spring loaded electromagnetic release).? Ideas that had come to me are: a linear array of infrared sensors (like the door chimes at your local 7-11) that sent signals to some processor which could determine the speed and then trigger the release. Or, some radar technology with a sensor that sent its signal to a controller.? I even toyed with the idea of "trip lines" of thread that opened (or closed as the case may be) switches that > also sent signals to a controller.? >My questions are; >What is best/most feasible?way to do this?? >Would one of you be willing to "hold my hand" as I stumble through my first DIY electronics project? >Finally, and perhaps most importantly, has anyone heard of or tried to do something similar or is it even worth it? > >Robert Braibish > > >? ? ? >_______________________________________________ >Rockets mailing list >Rockets at rocketsnw.com >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >? _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 30 09:08:29 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:08:29 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers In-Reply-To: <570418.20210.qm@web112910.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <5916745.1256908380192.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <570418.20210.qm@web112910.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: You could use infrared motion detectors or a more accurate Laser setup. You would have to crunch the numbers yourself and figure out where the tip of the nose will break the beam at the precise FPS that you are looking for. Once you have done that then you can mount the beam there. Granted this is only a solution for 1 rocket and would have to be refigured and reset for each individual rocket as no 2 rockets will reach velocity at the same point. On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Robert Braibish wrote: > Yes, the sole purpose is to minimize drag. Both with the removal of any > launch hardware on the rocket and by the removal of any unnecessary friction > on the rocket at the launch tower. To be honest I am not going for any > altitude records (yet) and this is more of a mental exercise at this point. > I'll also have to admit that I did not pencil out the exact range of speed > that things would need to happen at. I did rationalize though that I am > only talking about perhaps 2 inches, and the top of the tower is the only > part that needs to move (pivot), I had envisioned a pre-tensioned spring on > each guide, which in turn is held in place by an electromagnetic switch. I > just figured I could tension a spring enough to move the rail the two inches > in less time than the rocket would need to move the 2, 3 or 4 feet left on > the rails. I have found electromagnets that can hold 50lbs with the power of > just one D cell battery and I have seen an amazing > demonstration of a table saw with a spring loaded blade that has the > ability to sense if a hand - or other body part I reckon - has come into > contact with the blade (with a change in conductivity like the touch-on > lamps do) and then pull the blade down and out of the way. It literally > moves so fast, that the saw blade does not have the time to cut the > individual so I know some pretty fast speeds can be obtained. > I like the Idea of a sabo and of adjusting the rail height, I will > definitely look into those ideas further, but I didn't know the speed of the > electronics. I will continue to refine the math and get a better idea of > just what kind of speed I am talking about. Thanks to all for the input so > far. > > Robert Braibish > > > > > ________________________________ > From: "melamy at earthlink.net" > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Sent: Fri, October 30, 2009 6:13:00 AM > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] launch towers > > I think I would make the tower height adjustable so the stability is > reached just as the tower ends would be easier. You can sense the rocket > speed, but can you make an actuator for the rails that will operate in the > very low millisecond range? The problem that I see is by the time you can > get the guides out of the way, the rocket will already be gone. I don't have > rocksim available at the moment, but a high thrust rocket will more than > likely only be in launch guides for less than 200ms. You would actually have > to start the "removal" of the guides even before the rocket was up to speed > in order to get them out of the way. > > Of note, you would only need to make the upper guides "fall away" rather > than needing the entire guide length. The rocket will already be up the > tower anyway. The smaller the mechanical area, the lower the inertia will be > for the mechanism and the faster it can be moved. > > For a sensor array, keep in mind that mechanical switches with have > response times, so the thread idea is probably not quick enough. Light > sensors would be the easist and I would think that you could actually look > for the motor burn as you light source and sense that. > > best regards, Steve Thatcher > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Robert Braibish > >Sent: Oct 30, 2009 12:30 AM > >To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > >Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers > > > >I am tossing some ideas around in my head about launch towers and I have a > few questions to ask the electronic geeks among the group. My ideas center > around a launch tower that has the guides on actuators so they can drop away > from the rocket once the (pre-calculated) required stable velocity is > achieved (my understanding is somewhere between 40 fps & 50 fps for most > rockets). This means I need electronics that can accurately and quickly > determine the velocity of a rocket and then trigger the guide release (I am > thinking spring loaded electromagnetic release). Ideas that had come to me > are: a linear array of infrared sensors (like the door chimes at your local > 7-11) that sent signals to some processor which could determine the speed > and then trigger the release. Or, some radar technology with a sensor that > sent its signal to a controller. I even toyed with the idea of "trip lines" > of thread that opened (or closed as the case may be) switches that > > also sent signals to a controller. > >My questions are; > >What is best/most feasible way to do this? > >Would one of you be willing to "hold my hand" as I stumble through my > first DIY electronics project? > >Finally, and perhaps most importantly, has anyone heard of or tried to do > something similar or is it even worth it? > > > >Robert Braibish > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Rockets mailing list > >Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From sb at berfield.com Fri Oct 30 09:11:42 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:11:42 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers Message-ID: I have never used a tower, but am starting to get interested in trying for some higher altitude flights. In a standard setup, do the rails actually touch the body of the rocket? Are the lined with anything to minimize friction? -----Original Message----- From: Robert Braibish [mailto:cpovercg at rocketmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 08:17 AM To: melamy at earthlink.net, rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] launch towers Yes, the sole purpose is to minimize drag. Both with the removal of any launch hardware on the rocket and by the removal of any unnecessary friction on the rocket at the launch tower. To be honest I am not going for any altitude records (yet) and this is more of a mental exercise at this point. I'll also have to admit that I did not pencil out the exact range of speed that things would need to happen at. I did rationalize though that I am only talking about perhaps 2 inches, and the top of the tower is the only part that needs to move (pivot), I had envisioned a pre-tensioned spring on each guide, which in turn is held in place by an electromagnetic switch. I just figured I could tension a spring enough to move the rail the two inches in less time than the rocket would need to move the 2, 3 or 4 feet left on the rails. I have found electromagnets that can hold 50lbs with the power of just one D cell battery and I have seen an amazing demonstration of a table saw with a spring loaded blade that has the ability to sense if a hand - or other body part I reckon - has come into contact with the blade (with a change in conductivity like the touch-on lamps do) and then pull the blade down and out of the way. It literally moves so fast, that the saw blade does not have the time to cut the individual so I know some pretty fast speeds can be obtained.I like the Idea of a sabo and of adjusting the rail height, I will definitely look into those ideas further, but I didn't know the speed of the electronics. I will continue to refine the math and get a better idea of just what kind of speed I am talking about. Thanks to all for the input so far.Robert Braibish________________________________From: "melamy at earthlink.net" To: rockets at rocketsnw.comSent: Fri, October 30, 2009 6:13:00 AMSubject: Re: [RocketsNW] launch towersI think I would make the tower height adjustable so the stability is reached just as the tower ends would be easier. You can sense the rocket speed, but can you make an actuator for the rails that will operate in the very low millisecond range? The problem that I see is by the time you can get the guides out of the way, the rocket will already be gone. I don't have rocksim available at the moment, but a high thrust rocket will more than likely only be in launch guides for less than 200ms. You would actually have to start the "removal" of the guides even before the rocket was up to speed in order to get them out of the way.Of note, you would only need to make the upper guides "fall away" rather than needing the entire guide length. The rocket will already be up the tower anyway. The smaller the mechanical area, the lower the inertia will be for the mechanism and the faster it can be moved.For a sensor array, keep in mind that mechanical switches with have response times, so the thread idea is probably not quick enough. Light sensors would be the easist and I would think that you could actually look for the motor burn as you light source and sense that. best regards, Steve Thatcher-----Original Message----->From: Robert Braibish >Sent: Oct 30, 2009 12:30 AM>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com>Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers>>I am tossing some ideas around in my head about launch towers and I have a few questions to ask the electronic geeks among the group. My ideas center around a launch tower that has the guides on actuators so they can drop away from the rocket once the (pre-calculated) required stable velocity is achieved (my understanding is somewhere between 40 fps & 50 fps for most rockets). This means I need electronics that can accurately and quickly determine the velocity of a rocket and then trigger the guide release (I am thinking spring loaded electromagnetic release). Ideas that had come to me are: a linear array of infrared sensors (like the door chimes at your local 7-11) that sent signals to some processor which could determine the speed and then trigger the release. Or, some radar technology with a sensor that sent its signal to a controller. I even toyed with the idea of "trip lines" of thread that opened (or closed as the case may be) switches that> also sent signals to a controller. >My questions are; >What is best/most feasible way to do this? >Would one of you be willing to "hold my hand" as I stumble through my first DIY electronics project? >Finally, and perhaps most importantly, has anyone heard of or tried to do something similar or is it even worth it?>>Robert Braibish>>> >_______________________________________________>Rockets mailing list>Rockets at rocketsnw.com>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets> _______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 30 09:36:08 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:36:08 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: If you are looking to reduce friction, gain fast speeds at launch, and even greater altitudes you should do some research on the launching mechanisms of the Spirit Missile. Try this URL to start with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprint_%28missile%29 On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 9:11 AM, Scott Berfield wrote: > I have never used a tower, but am starting to get interested in trying for > some higher altitude flights. In a standard setup, do the rails actually > touch the body of the rocket? Are the lined with anything to minimize > friction? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Braibish [mailto:cpovercg at rocketmail.com] > Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 08:17 AM > To: melamy at earthlink.net, rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] launch towers > > Yes, the sole purpose is to minimize drag. Both with the removal of any > launch hardware on the rocket and by the removal of any unnecessary friction > on the rocket at the launch tower. To be honest I am not going for any > altitude records (yet) and this is more of a mental exercise at this point. > I'll also have to admit that I did not pencil out the exact range of speed > that things would need to happen at. I did rationalize though that I am only > talking about perhaps 2 inches, and the top of the tower is the only part > that needs to move (pivot), I had envisioned a pre-tensioned spring on each > guide, which in turn is held in place by an electromagnetic switch. I just > figured I could tension a spring enough to move the rail the two inches in > less time than the rocket would need to move the 2, 3 or 4 feet left on the > rails. I have found electromagnets that can hold 50lbs with the power of > just one D cell battery and I have seen an amazing demonstration of a table > saw with a spring > loaded blade that has the ability to sense if a hand - or other body part > I reckon - has come into contact with the blade (with a change in > conductivity like the touch-on lamps do) and then pull the blade down and > out of the way. It literally moves so fast, that the saw blade does not have > the time to cut the individual so I know some pretty fast speeds can be > obtained.I like the Idea of a sabo and of adjusting the rail height, I will > definitely look into those ideas further, but I didn't know the speed of the > electronics. I will continue to refine the math and get a better idea of > just what kind of speed I am talking about. Thanks to all for the input so > far.Robert Braibish________________________________From: " > melamy at earthlink.net" To: rockets at rocketsnw.comSent: Fri, October 30, 2009 > 6:13:00 AMSubject: Re: [RocketsNW] launch towersI think I would make the > tower height adjustable so the stability is reached just as the tower ends > would be easier. You can sense the rocket s > peed, but can you make an actuator for the rails that will operate in > the very low millisecond range? The problem that I see is by the time you > can get the guides out of the way, the rocket will already be gone. I don't > have rocksim available at the moment, but a high thrust rocket will more > than likely only be in launch guides for less than 200ms. You would actually > have to start the "removal" of the guides even before the rocket was up to > speed in order to get them out of the way.Of note, you would only need to > make the upper guides "fall away" rather than needing the entire guide > length. The rocket will already be up the tower anyway. The smaller the > mechanical area, the lower the inertia will be for the mechanism and the > faster it can be moved.For a sensor array, keep in mind that mechanical > switches with have response times, so the thread idea is probably not quick > enough. Light sensors would be the easist and I would think that you could > actually look for the motor burn as you light source and sense that. best > regards, Steve Thatcher---- > -Original Message----->From: Robert Braibish >Sent: Oct 30, 2009 12:30 > AM>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com>Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers>>I am > tossing some ideas around in my head about launch towers and I have a few > questions to ask the electronic geeks among the group. My ideas center > around a launch tower that has the guides on actuators so they can drop away > from the rocket once the (pre-calculated) required stable velocity is > achieved (my understanding is somewhere between 40 fps & 50 fps for most > rockets). This means I need electronics that can accurately and quickly > determine the velocity of a rocket and then trigger the guide release (I am > thinking spring loaded electromagnetic release). Ideas that had come to me > are: a linear array of infrared sensors (like the door chimes at your local > 7-11) that sent signals to some processor which could determine the speed > and then trigger the release. Or, some radar technology with a sensor that > sent its signal to a controller. I > even toyed with the idea of "trip lines" of thread that opened (or cl > osed as the case may be) switches that> also sent signals to a controller. > >My questions are; >What is best/most feasible way to do this? >Would one of > you be willing to "hold my hand" as I stumble through my first DIY > electronics project? >Finally, and perhaps most importantly, has anyone > heard of or tried to do something similar or is it even worth it?>>Robert > Braibish>>> >_______________________________________________>Rockets mailing > list>Rockets at rocketsnw.com> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets> > _______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets > @rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets_______________________________________________Rockets mailing > listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From rocfish74 at hotmail.com Fri Oct 30 09:37:57 2009 From: rocfish74 at hotmail.com (Mark Lyons) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:37:57 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] I'm stil trying to send to message to Rockets NW In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Howdy, Ryan > Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:17:44 -0700 > From: ryan98391 at gmail.com > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [RocketsNW] I'm stil trying to send to message to Rockets NW > > Testing. 1,2,3 > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > _________________________________________________________________ Windows 7: It works the way you want. Learn more. http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/windows-7/default.aspx?ocid=PID24727::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_evergreen2:102009 From sb at berfield.com Fri Oct 30 09:48:48 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:48:48 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers Message-ID: Wow - that thing is insane! Wonder if they'd let me do an explosive/spring deployment at a launch... be fun to work out. -----Original Message----- From: Christopher Guenther [mailto:guentherchristopher at gmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 09:36 AM To: 'Scott Berfield' Cc: 'Robert Braibish', melamy at earthlink.net, rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] launch towers If you are looking to reduce friction, gain fast speeds at launch, and even greater altitudes you should do some research on the launching mechanisms of the Spirit Missile. Try this URL to start with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprint_%28missile%29 On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 9:11 AM, Scott Berfield wrote: I have never used a tower, but am starting to get interested in trying for some higher altitude flights. In a standard setup, do the rails actually touch the body of the rocket? Are the lined with anything to minimize friction? -----Original Message----- From: Robert Braibish [mailto:cpovercg at rocketmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 08:17 AM To: melamy at earthlink.net, rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] launch towers Yes, the sole purpose is to minimize drag. Both with the removal of any launch hardware on the rocket and by the removal of any unnecessary friction on the rocket at the launch tower. To be honest I am not going for any altitude records (yet) and this is more of a mental exercise at this point. I'll also have to admit that I did not pencil out the exact range of speed that things would need to happen at. I did rationalize though that I am only talking about perhaps 2 inches, and the top of the tower is the only part that needs to move (pivot), I had envisioned a pre-tensioned spring on each guide, which in turn is held in place by an electromagnetic switch. I just figured I could tension a spring enough to move the rail the two inches in less time than the rocket would need to move the 2, 3 or 4 feet left on the rails. I have found electromagnets that can hold 50lbs with the power of just one D cell battery and I have seen an amazing demonstration of a table saw with a spring loaded blade that has the ability to sense if a hand - or other body part I reckon - has come into contact with the blade (with a change in conductivity like the touch-on lamps do) and then pull the blade down and out of the way. It literally moves so fast, that the saw blade does not have the time to cut the individual so I know some pretty fast speeds can be obtained.I like the Idea of a sabo and of adjusting the rail height, I will definitely look into those ideas further, but I didn't know the speed of the electronics. I will continue to refine the math and get a better idea of just what kind of speed I am talking about. Thanks to all for the input so far.Robert Braibish________________________________From: "melamy at earthlink.net" To: rockets at rocketsnw.comSent: Fri, October 30, 2009 6:13:00 AMSubject: Re: [RocketsNW] launch towersI think I would make the tower height adjustable so the stability is reached just as the tower ends would be easier. You can sense the rocket s peed, but can you make an actuator for the rails that will operate in the very low millisecond range? The problem that I see is by the time you can get the guides out of the way, the rocket will already be gone. I don't have rocksim available at the moment, but a high thrust rocket will more than likely only be in launch guides for less than 200ms. You would actually have to start the "removal" of the guides even before the rocket was up to speed in order to get them out of the way.Of note, you would only need to make the upper guides "fall away" rather than needing the entire guide length. The rocket will already be up the tower anyway. The smaller the mechanical area, the lower the inertia will be for the mechanism and the faster it can be moved.For a sensor array, keep in mind that mechanical switches with have response times, so the thread idea is probably not quick enough. Light sensors would be the easist and I would think that you could actually look for the motor burn as you light source and sense that. best regards, Steve Thatcher---- -Original Message----->From: Robert Braibish >Sent: Oct 30, 2009 12:30 AM>To: rockets at rocketsnw.com>Subject: [RocketsNW] launch towers>>I am tossing some ideas around in my head about launch towers and I have a few questions to ask the electronic geeks among the group. My ideas center around a launch tower that has the guides on actuators so they can drop away from the rocket once the (pre-calculated) required stable velocity is achieved (my understanding is somewhere between 40 fps & 50 fps for most rockets). This means I need electronics that can accurately and quickly determine the velocity of a rocket and then trigger the guide release (I am thinking spring loaded electromagnetic release). Ideas that had come to me are: a linear array of infrared sensors (like the door chimes at your local 7-11) that sent signals to some processor which could determine the speed and then trigger the release. Or, some radar technology with a sensor that sent its signal to a controller. I even toyed with the idea of "trip lines" of thread that opened (or cl osed as the case may be) switches that> also sent signals to a controller. >My questions are; >What is best/most feasible way to do this? >Would one of you be willing to "hold my hand" as I stumble through my first DIY electronics project? >Finally, and perhaps most importantly, has anyone heard of or tried to do something similar or is it even worth it?>>Robert Braibish>>> >_______________________________________________>Rockets mailing list>Rockets at rocketsnw.com>http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets> _______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________Rockets mailing listRockets at rocketsnw.comhttp://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From clappfamily at comcast.net Fri Oct 30 10:52:49 2009 From: clappfamily at comcast.net (clappfamily at comcast.net) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:52:49 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [RocketsNW] Rocketober Launch Message-ID: <722085855.2630021256925169205.JavaMail.root@sz0014a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> On Saturday or Sunday morning at Brothers we had a great sunrise.? The light was hitting the Sisters Mountains and really made them glow.? I posted the photo I captured in?the NW Image Gallery.? I hope to post some other shots from Brothers in the near future. Enjoy Rick From rockets at penian.com Fri Oct 30 11:04:57 2009 From: rockets at penian.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Paul=20Nelson?=) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:04:57 -0800 Subject: [RocketsNW] =?iso-8859-1?q?How_dimples_work?= Message-ID: <20091030180457.18152.qmail@server298.com> Sorry I'm late to the discussion about dimples, but I don't think anybody got it right. The dimples don't extend the range of a golf ball by boundary layer control or turbulence inducing or anything like that. The extended range comes from lift, and the lift comes from back spin, and the back spin comes from the angle of the face of the driver. The dimples help drag air around the spinning golf ball, increasing the air velocity on the top of the ball and decreasing the air velocity on the bottom of the ball, effectively working as an airfoil. It turns the golf ball into a very inefficient glider by Bernoulli's principle. The bottom line is that dimples increase drag but will create lift on a spinning body. I can't think of any rocketry application except to reduce max altitude (low ceiling) but there are lots of easier ways to do that. Paul Nelson, PE http://rocketry.penian.com/ From jhadv at pacifier.com Fri Oct 30 11:21:36 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (Paul Bogdanich) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:21:36 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20091030111304.032c14a8@mail.iinet.com> From the Wiki article "The Sprint accelerated at 100 g, reaching a speed of Mach 10 in 5 seconds." Makes one wonder about the veracity of those peak accelerometer readings we get doesn't it? A sustained 100g is awfully fast. As an aside, if I recall correctly the Air Force publications I read put the first stage acceleration at 130g. Way, way, way fast. From robert.krausert at intel.com Fri Oct 30 13:33:11 2009 From: robert.krausert at intel.com (Krausert, Robert) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:33:11 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20091030111304.032c14a8@mail.iinet.com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20091030111304.032c14a8@mail.iinet.com> Message-ID: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43E6EA63@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Wonder if a cockroach could survive 100g's. My fear is that they could survive it. Cheers, Robert -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Paul Bogdanich Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 11:22 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile From the Wiki article "The Sprint accelerated at 100 g, reaching a speed of Mach 10 in 5 seconds." Makes one wonder about the veracity of those peak accelerometer readings we get doesn't it? A sustained 100g is awfully fast. As an aside, if I recall correctly the Air Force publications I read put the first stage acceleration at 130g. Way, way, way fast. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From vonrang at yahoo.com Fri Oct 30 13:39:59 2009 From: vonrang at yahoo.com (Sam Grado) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:39:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20091030111304.032c14a8@mail.iinet.com> Message-ID: <863477.76365.qm@web52202.mail.re2.yahoo.com> I am more curious about the N/C and airframe composite materials that could handle that kind of frictional heat generated during flight. ? The nose on the SPRINT would glow during its flight. It's design was based on early 1970's technology. I wonder what was used? Sam Grado TRA L2 "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! sales at pvconly.com http://www.pvconly.com http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets --- On Fri, 10/30/09, Paul Bogdanich wrote: From: Paul Bogdanich Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 1:21 PM >From the Wiki article "The Sprint accelerated at 100 g, reaching a speed of Mach 10 in 5 seconds." Makes one wonder about the veracity of those peak accelerometer readings we get doesn't it?? A sustained 100g is awfully fast.? As an aside, if I recall correctly the Air Force publications I read put the first stage acceleration at 130g.? Way, way, way fast. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From sb at berfield.com Fri Oct 30 13:44:33 2009 From: sb at berfield.com (Scott Berfield) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 20:44:33 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] I guess I'm not the only one... Message-ID: To have the occasional deployment problem: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091030/ap_on_sc/us_sci_moon_rocket_test_4 From daron at daronjohnson.com Fri Oct 30 13:56:40 2009 From: daron at daronjohnson.com (Daron Johnson) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:56:40 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] [personal] I guess I'm not the only one... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000a01ca59a3$7c9855e0$75c901a0$@com> I love this part "The $445 million flight test was the first step in NASA's effort to return astronauts to the moon. The White House may change direction, however, and scrap the Ares I in favor of other rockets and destinations." Typical Gov't. -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Scott Berfield Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 1:45 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: [personal] [RocketsNW] I guess I'm not the only one... To have the occasional deployment problem: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091030/ap_on_sc/us_sci_moon_rocket_test_4 _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 30 15:16:26 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:16:26 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile In-Reply-To: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43E6EA63@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20091030111304.032c14a8@mail.iinet.com> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43E6EA63@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: I fear that not only can a Cockroach survive a force of 100+ G's but that that is how they got here in the first place. Blame it on the little gray guys they brought them here. On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Krausert, Robert wrote: > Wonder if a cockroach could survive 100g's. My fear is that they could > survive it. > > Cheers, > Robert > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Paul Bogdanich > Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 11:22 AM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile > > From the Wiki article "The Sprint accelerated at 100 g, reaching a speed > of Mach 10 in 5 seconds." > > Makes one wonder about the veracity of those peak accelerometer readings we > get doesn't it? A sustained 100g is awfully fast. As an aside, if I > recall correctly the Air Force publications I read put the first stage > acceleration at 130g. Way, way, way fast. > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From robert.krausert at intel.com Fri Oct 30 15:21:59 2009 From: robert.krausert at intel.com (Krausert, Robert) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:21:59 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.2.20091030111304.032c14a8@mail.iinet.com> <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43E6EA63@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: <0D4616E6925F9541919B60692F61509E43E6EC15@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com> Well I certainly know that's how a few members of my family go here on Earth. Oops, did I just ackowledge that I have a crazy side of the family? Oh well. ;-) Cheers, Robert [not crazy] ________________________________ From: Christopher Guenther [mailto:guentherchristopher at gmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 3:16 PM To: Krausert, Robert Cc: Paul Bogdanich; rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile I fear that not only can a Cockroach survive a force of 100+ G's but that that is how they got here in the first place. Blame it on the little gray guys they brought them here. On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Krausert, Robert > wrote: Wonder if a cockroach could survive 100g's. My fear is that they could survive it. Cheers, Robert -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Paul Bogdanich Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 11:22 AM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile From the Wiki article "The Sprint accelerated at 100 g, reaching a speed of Mach 10 in 5 seconds." Makes one wonder about the veracity of those peak accelerometer readings we get doesn't it? A sustained 100g is awfully fast. As an aside, if I recall correctly the Air Force publications I read put the first stage acceleration at 130g. Way, way, way fast. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 30 15:22:10 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:22:10 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] [personal] I guess I'm not the only one... In-Reply-To: <000a01ca59a3$7c9855e0$75c901a0$@com> References: <000a01ca59a3$7c9855e0$75c901a0$@com> Message-ID: With $445 million dollars I bet the guys with Space Ship One could get to the moon and back 445 time! I think it is time we kick NASA aside and get some fresh blood flowing in the American Space Program! On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Daron Johnson wrote: > I love this part > "The $445 million flight test was the first step in NASA's effort to return > astronauts to the moon. The White House may change direction, however, and > scrap the Ares I in favor of other rockets and destinations." > > Typical Gov't. > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Scott Berfield > Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 1:45 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Subject: [personal] [RocketsNW] I guess I'm not the only one... > > To have the occasional deployment problem: > http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091030/ap_on_sc/us_sci_moon_rocket_test_4 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From absworld at cet.com Fri Oct 30 15:30:29 2009 From: absworld at cet.com (Bob & Ann Yanecek) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:30:29 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile In-Reply-To: <863477.76365.qm@web52202.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20091030111304.032c14a8@mail.iinet.com> <863477.76365.qm@web52202.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <004201ca59b0$96dbe4f0$c493aed0$@com> I'm not sure about SPRINT but Standard Missile Nosecone's (aka radome) were exposed to extreme frictional heating. To test them, they were dipped in molted salt. Consumer spin-off = Corningware cookware. Bob Yanecek -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Sam Grado Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 1:40 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com; Paul Bogdanich Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile I am more curious about the N/C and airframe composite materials that could handle that kind of frictional heat generated during flight. ? The nose on the SPRINT would glow during its flight. It's design was based on early 1970's technology. I wonder what was used? Sam Grado TRA L2 "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! sales at pvconly.com http://www.pvconly.com http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets --- On Fri, 10/30/09, Paul Bogdanich wrote: From: Paul Bogdanich Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 1:21 PM >From the Wiki article "The Sprint accelerated at 100 g, reaching a speed of Mach 10 in 5 seconds." Makes one wonder about the veracity of those peak accelerometer readings we get doesn't it?? A sustained 100g is awfully fast.? As an aside, if I recall correctly the Air Force publications I read put the first stage acceleration at 130g.? Way, way, way fast. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 30 15:37:41 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:37:41 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile In-Reply-To: <004201ca59b0$96dbe4f0$c493aed0$@com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20091030111304.032c14a8@mail.iinet.com> <863477.76365.qm@web52202.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <004201ca59b0$96dbe4f0$c493aed0$@com> Message-ID: So if I were to send a nose cone to the Corningware factory and ask them to dip it for me then I would in effect have a nose cone that could withstand that level of friction? On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Bob & Ann Yanecek wrote: > I'm not sure about SPRINT but Standard Missile Nosecone's (aka radome) were > exposed to extreme frictional heating. > To test them, they were dipped in molted salt. > > Consumer spin-off = Corningware cookware. > > Bob Yanecek > > -----Original Message----- > From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] > On Behalf Of Sam Grado > Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 1:40 PM > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com; Paul Bogdanich > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile > > I am more curious about the N/C and airframe composite materials that could > handle that kind of frictional heat generated during flight. > > The nose on the SPRINT would glow during its flight. It's design was based > on early 1970's technology. I wonder what was used? > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Fri, 10/30/09, Paul Bogdanich wrote: > > > From: Paul Bogdanich > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 1:21 PM > > > >From the Wiki article "The Sprint accelerated at 100 g, reaching a speed > of > Mach 10 in 5 seconds." > > Makes one wonder about the veracity of those peak accelerometer readings we > get doesn't it? A sustained 100g is awfully fast. As an aside, if I > recall > correctly the Air Force publications I read put the first stage > acceleration > at 130g. Way, way, way fast. > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Fri Oct 30 15:53:02 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:53:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] How dimples work In-Reply-To: <20091030180457.18152.qmail@server298.com> References: <20091030180457.18152.qmail@server298.com> Message-ID: The dimples drag the air around the golf ball by controlling and using the boundary layer turbulence for desired effect. It is the specific nature of the kind of boundary layer effect the dimples produce that drags the air. Can we agree on that? Putting an "aerodynamic delaminating" ring around a rocket body is a different way of deliberately inducing turbulence for desired effect. Here, the idea is to create a thinner and more consistent turbulent boundary layer rather than allow randomness to create a time-varying turbulent layer that on the average creates more drag. It's a small overall effect, but an important one in situations like contests, especially contests where consistency is important. Or so believed many of the NAR's finest contestants. The dimpled Estes nose cone is on a rocket obviously designed to be "low and slow." I'd be extremely surprised if it actually improved performance. But it seems to me to be a kit just begging for someone to take actual measurements from flights. +McG+ > Sorry I'm late to the discussion about dimples, but I don't think anybody > got it right. The dimples don't extend the range of a golf ball by > boundary layer control or turbulence inducing or anything like that. The > extended range comes from lift, and the lift comes from back spin, and the > back spin comes from the angle of the face of the driver. The dimples help > drag air around the spinning golf ball, increasing the air velocity on the > top of the ball and decreasing the air velocity on the bottom of the ball, > effectively working as an airfoil. It turns the golf ball into a very > inefficient glider by Bernoulli's principle. > > The bottom line is that dimples increase drag but will create lift on a > spinning body. I can't think of any rocketry application except to reduce > max altitude (low ceiling) but there are lots of easier ways to do that. > > Paul Nelson, PE > http://rocketry.penian.com/ > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Fri Oct 30 16:01:38 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:01:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile In-Reply-To: <863477.76365.qm@web52202.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <863477.76365.qm@web52202.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <02ac3e4b2e2f64f25fce47b9899a1101.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> I glanced through a PDF I dug up from the last Sprint discussion. It said they used silica phenolic--your basic reentry heat shield and molded hobby rocket nozzle material. As for the underlying structure, I dunno. Didn't dig that far. Heck of a rocket when you have to coat it with reentry heat shield stuff for the trip up! +McG+ > I am more curious about the N/C and airframe composite materials that > could handle that kind of frictional heat generated during flight. > ? > The nose on the SPRINT would glow during its flight. It's design was based > on early 1970's technology. I wonder what was used? > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Fri, 10/30/09, Paul Bogdanich wrote: > > > From: Paul Bogdanich > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 1:21 PM > > >>From the Wiki article "The Sprint accelerated at 100 g, reaching a speed >> of Mach 10 in 5 seconds." > > Makes one wonder about the veracity of those peak accelerometer readings > we get doesn't it?? A sustained 100g is awfully fast.? As an aside, if I > recall correctly the Air Force publications I read put the first stage > acceleration at 130g.? Way, way, way fast. > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From krislhull at comcast.net Fri Oct 30 16:05:27 2009 From: krislhull at comcast.net (krislhull at comcast.net) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 23:05:27 +0000 Subject: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile In-Reply-To: <02ac3e4b2e2f64f25fce47b9899a1101.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> References: <863477.76365.qm@web52202.mail.re2.yahoo.com><02ac3e4b2e2f64f25fce47b9899a1101.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Message-ID: <114684206-1256943965-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-986678530-@bda793.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> Do you still have that pdf? Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:01:38 To: Sam Grado Cc: ; Paul Bogdanich Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile I glanced through a PDF I dug up from the last Sprint discussion. It said they used silica phenolic--your basic reentry heat shield and molded hobby rocket nozzle material. As for the underlying structure, I dunno. Didn't dig that far. Heck of a rocket when you have to coat it with reentry heat shield stuff for the trip up! +McG+ > I am more curious about the N/C and airframe composite materials that > could handle that kind of frictional heat generated during flight. > ? > The nose on the SPRINT would glow during its flight. It's design was based > on early 1970's technology. I wonder what was used? > > Sam Grado > TRA L2 > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > sales at pvconly.com > http://www.pvconly.com > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > --- On Fri, 10/30/09, Paul Bogdanich wrote: > > > From: Paul Bogdanich > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 1:21 PM > > >>From the Wiki article "The Sprint accelerated at 100 g, reaching a speed >> of Mach 10 in 5 seconds." > > Makes one wonder about the veracity of those peak accelerometer readings > we get doesn't it?? A sustained 100g is awfully fast.? As an aside, if I > recall correctly the Air Force publications I read put the first stage > acceleration at 130g.? Way, way, way fast. >_______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > >_______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 30 16:09:26 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:09:26 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile In-Reply-To: <02ac3e4b2e2f64f25fce47b9899a1101.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> References: <863477.76365.qm@web52202.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <02ac3e4b2e2f64f25fce47b9899a1101.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Message-ID: So then its basically made of the same material as the heat shield pieces that came off the space shuttle and cause a reentry CATO? On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:01 PM, wrote: > I glanced through a PDF I dug up from the last Sprint discussion. It said > they used silica phenolic--your basic reentry heat shield and molded hobby > rocket nozzle material. As for the underlying structure, I dunno. Didn't > dig that far. > > Heck of a rocket when you have to coat it with reentry heat shield stuff > for the trip up! > +McG+ > > > > I am more curious about the N/C and airframe composite materials that > > could handle that kind of frictional heat generated during flight. > > > > The nose on the SPRINT would glow during its flight. It's design was > based > > on early 1970's technology. I wonder what was used? > > > > Sam Grado > > TRA L2 > > > > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > > > > sales at pvconly.com > > http://www.pvconly.com > > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > > > > --- On Fri, 10/30/09, Paul Bogdanich wrote: > > > > > > From: Paul Bogdanich > > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile > > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > > Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 1:21 PM > > > > > >>From the Wiki article "The Sprint accelerated at 100 g, reaching a speed > >> of Mach 10 in 5 seconds." > > > > Makes one wonder about the veracity of those peak accelerometer readings > > we get doesn't it? A sustained 100g is awfully fast. As an aside, if I > > recall correctly the Air Force publications I read put the first stage > > acceleration at 130g. Way, way, way fast. > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rockets mailing list > > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com Fri Oct 30 16:24:59 2009 From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com (kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:24:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile In-Reply-To: References: <863477.76365.qm@web52202.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <02ac3e4b2e2f64f25fce47b9899a1101.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Message-ID: > So then its basically made of the same material as the heat shield pieces > that came off the space shuttle and cause a reentry CATO? No. That's silica foam. Silica phenolic looks like plastic(because it is, phenolic) but has a substantial amount of silica filler material. Aerotech nozzles for their smaller reloads are silica phenolic. When heated, silica phenolic turns to carbon impregnated with silica, that crusty stuff on the inside of reload nozzles after use. 'Glassy graphite', sort of... +McG+ > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:01 PM, wrote: > >> I glanced through a PDF I dug up from the last Sprint discussion. It >> said >> they used silica phenolic--your basic reentry heat shield and molded >> hobby >> rocket nozzle material. As for the underlying structure, I dunno. >> Didn't >> dig that far. >> >> Heck of a rocket when you have to coat it with reentry heat shield stuff >> for the trip up! >> +McG+ >> >> >> > I am more curious about the N/C and airframe composite materials that >> > could handle that kind of frictional heat generated during flight. >> > >> > The nose on the SPRINT would glow during its flight. It's design was >> based >> > on early 1970's technology. I wonder what was used? >> > >> > Sam Grado >> > TRA L2 >> > >> > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! >> > >> > sales at pvconly.com >> > http://www.pvconly.com >> > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html >> > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets >> > >> > --- On Fri, 10/30/09, Paul Bogdanich wrote: >> > >> > >> > From: Paul Bogdanich >> > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile >> > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 1:21 PM >> > >> > >> >>From the Wiki article "The Sprint accelerated at 100 g, reaching a >> speed >> >> of Mach 10 in 5 seconds." >> > >> > Makes one wonder about the veracity of those peak accelerometer >> readings >> > we get doesn't it? A sustained 100g is awfully fast. As an aside, if >> I >> > recall correctly the Air Force publications I read put the first stage >> > acceleration at 130g. Way, way, way fast. >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Rockets mailing list >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Rockets mailing list >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> > >> > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rockets mailing list >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets >> >> > From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Fri Oct 30 16:36:13 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:36:13 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile In-Reply-To: References: <863477.76365.qm@web52202.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <02ac3e4b2e2f64f25fce47b9899a1101.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> Message-ID: So if I were to save all my nozzles from my level 1 and 2 reloads I could grind them to powder and mix with an yet unidentified bonding agent then pour it into a blow mold I could make a similar nose cone. Is that right? On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:24 PM, wrote: > > So then its basically made of the same material as the heat shield pieces > > that came off the space shuttle and cause a reentry CATO? > > No. That's silica foam. Silica phenolic looks like plastic(because it > is, phenolic) but has a substantial amount of silica filler material. > Aerotech nozzles for their smaller reloads are silica phenolic. When > heated, silica phenolic turns to carbon impregnated with silica, that > crusty stuff on the inside of reload nozzles after use. 'Glassy > graphite', sort of... > +McG+ > > > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:01 PM, wrote: > > > >> I glanced through a PDF I dug up from the last Sprint discussion. It > >> said > >> they used silica phenolic--your basic reentry heat shield and molded > >> hobby > >> rocket nozzle material. As for the underlying structure, I dunno. > >> Didn't > >> dig that far. > >> > >> Heck of a rocket when you have to coat it with reentry heat shield stuff > >> for the trip up! > >> +McG+ > >> > >> > >> > I am more curious about the N/C and airframe composite materials that > >> > could handle that kind of frictional heat generated during flight. > >> > > >> > The nose on the SPRINT would glow during its flight. It's design was > >> based > >> > on early 1970's technology. I wonder what was used? > >> > > >> > Sam Grado > >> > TRA L2 > >> > > >> > "If you're going to build it, build it from scratch"! > >> > > >> > sales at pvconly.com > >> > http://www.pvconly.com > >> > http://www.sugarshot.org/bios/sgrado.html > >> > http://groups.google.com/group/PVC-Motor-Rockets > >> > > >> > --- On Fri, 10/30/09, Paul Bogdanich wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > From: Paul Bogdanich > >> > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile > >> > To: rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> > Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 1:21 PM > >> > > >> > > >> >>From the Wiki article "The Sprint accelerated at 100 g, reaching a > >> speed > >> >> of Mach 10 in 5 seconds." > >> > > >> > Makes one wonder about the veracity of those peak accelerometer > >> readings > >> > we get doesn't it? A sustained 100g is awfully fast. As an aside, if > >> I > >> > recall correctly the Air Force publications I read put the first stage > >> > acceleration at 130g. Way, way, way fast. > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Rockets mailing list > >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Rockets mailing list > >> > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Rockets mailing list > >> Rockets at rocketsnw.com > >> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > >> > >> > > > > > From andrewm at hawkfeather.com Fri Oct 30 17:03:56 2009 From: andrewm at hawkfeather.com (Andrew MacMillen) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:03:56 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile In-Reply-To: <114684206-1256943965-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-986678530-@bda793.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> References: <863477.76365.qm@web52202.mail.re2.yahoo.com><02ac3e4b2e2f64f25fce47b9899a1101.squirrel@www.wa-net.com> <114684206-1256943965-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-986678530-@bda793.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> Message-ID: <4AEB7EEC.6060901@hawkfeather.com> http://srmsc.org/pdf/004431p0.pdf krislhull at comcast.net wrote: > Do you still have that pdf? > > -----Original Message----- > From: kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com > Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:01:38 > To: Sam Grado > Cc: ; Paul Bogdanich > Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Sprint Missile > > I glanced through a PDF I dug up from the last Sprint discussion. It said > they used silica phenolic--your basic reentry heat shield and molded hobby > rocket nozzle material. As for the underlying structure, I dunno. Didn't > dig that far. [snip] From rod at whippetfield.com Fri Oct 30 21:19:30 2009 From: rod at whippetfield.com (Rod) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 21:19:30 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Boston Globe, Ares I-X Photos References: Message-ID: <927BDA99C54B424DB935DFAE727CE13E@DANE> Check out these photos of the Ares I-X rocket. http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/10/launch_of_the_ares_ix.html I especially enjoyed photo #13 which shows a worker inside the fuel grain of the solid motor. I think I can see him holding the RMS instruction sheet and reading, "Install the 1/16" dia. o-ring in the forward seal disc". We've all noticed that the larger diameter motors are easier to assemble but this is ridiculous! Seriously, these are some neat photos. This website often has great photo sets of a wide range of subjects. Rod M. From brodwcjj at integrity.com Sat Oct 31 10:53:45 2009 From: brodwcjj at integrity.com (brodwcjj at integrity.com) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 12:53:45 -0500 Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41958416ca5e41968e0b7e052abad3fe.squirrel@wm.integrity.com> Having flown a Rock-It on a D Fatter than a Big Bertha I expected it to be real slow and low. I was surprised at it's altitude. I'm not good at judging approximate altitudes but I recall on that low wind day that I had a LONG walk to recover it. Did have a bit larger chute than the stock Estes plastic one. Dustin BAR-NAR-TRA L2-and still like them little buggers The dimpled Estes nose cone is on a rocket obviously designed to be "low and slow." I'd be extremely surprised if it actually improved performance. But it seems to me to be a kit just begging for someone to take actual measurements from flights. +McG+ From guentherchristopher at gmail.com Sat Oct 31 11:19:16 2009 From: guentherchristopher at gmail.com (Christopher Guenther) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 11:19:16 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] dimples In-Reply-To: <41958416ca5e41968e0b7e052abad3fe.squirrel@wm.integrity.com> References: <41958416ca5e41968e0b7e052abad3fe.squirrel@wm.integrity.com> Message-ID: I think it was the larger Chute that made you walk. Why don't you go out and get another Rock-it and a regular nose cone and drag race the 2 of them side by side a few times on the same motors to test this theory. Just a thought. On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:53 AM, wrote: > Having flown a Rock-It on a D Fatter than a Big Bertha I expected it > to be real slow and low. I was surprised at it's altitude. I'm not good > at judging approximate altitudes but I recall on that low wind day that I > had a LONG walk to recover it. Did have a bit larger chute than the > stock Estes plastic one. > > Dustin > > BAR-NAR-TRA L2-and still like them little buggers > > > > The dimpled Estes nose cone is on a rocket obviously designed to be "low > and slow." I'd be extremely surprised if it actually improved > performance. But it seems to me to be a kit just begging for someone to > take actual measurements from flights. > > +McG+ > > > _______________________________________________ > Rockets mailing list > Rockets at rocketsnw.com > http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets > > From cpovercg at rocketmail.com Sat Oct 31 12:26:56 2009 From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com (Robert Braibish) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 12:26:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] The New RocketsNW Web Site Message-ID: <681081.22900.qm@web112915.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Hello everyone.? I am sending this message out to the group on behalf of the RocketsNW site development team.? As you may recall a handful of us are putting together a new RocketsNW web site and we have made some really great progress.? Though we do not have a specific start-date we will be kicking things off soon.? Our efforts are currently focused on two main areas:??building on what is great about the existing site - a location to share your movies and pictures of all things rocketry, but to make it easier to use, and organized in a logical manner.? ?Secondly creating a website that is also a wealth of topical, relevant content.? Content that will include everything from launch reports and how-to tutorials to a regional calendar and links to other regional and national sites and resources. ??In many ways, we are trying to capture the volumes of knowledge and experience that shows up every day on the mailing list posts.? To that end, we would like to ask you for some help.? We are hoping to hit the ground running when the new site is introduced but to do so, we need content from you.? We are looking for submissions on all topics about rocketry.? Below is a short list to give you an idea of what we are looking for.? Write-ups of your clubs latest event, or about one coming up, or, if you have it, something about a favorite past event. Lessons learned from your latest success, or? failure. A List of active links to your favorite websites, there is a lot of great information out there, help us share it. A tutorial or guide on any rocketry topic; recovery? avionics? tools and techniques? you name it. Any subject that has something to do with rocketry, we want to hear about it from you, Pictures and videos of your latest (or favorite) projects, launches, motor tests - anything rocketry. One of the great things about this region is the wide range of experience and interests within the rocketry hobby we have.? Whether you launched your first rocket last week or, you have been doing this for decades we want to make this site something you can call your own and we want to hear about your experience. Another great thing is the wide range of non-rocketry knowledge in the northwest.? Perhaps your interests are Woodworking or Metal work, maybe amateur radio or electronics, maybe you work in the plastics industry or graphics.? All of these non-rocketry fields could be the source of many articles that would make for great content when applied to your interest in rocketry. Here are the submission requirements: 1)????? ?We would like the submissions to be original work ? as much as possible.? For all information, data, pictures and videos used, that are not your own, we ask that you cite properly and give due credit.? It would also be a good idea to contact the owner of the work/media and discuss your intent. 2)????? It should have something to do with the hobby of rocketry. 3)????? Submissions can be short or long, but do your best to keep them relevant and on topic.? We also ask that for articles with a mix of media (text, with pictures or video etc.) that the submission be as ?complete? as possible.? There are just a few of us putting this information on the site and the less editing we have to do, the more content we will be able to upload. 4)????? If you have content on a personal web page?or are a vendor/purveyor of rocketry stuff, and would like to share information,?or be represented,?let us know. We will try to develop the best way for that to happen. 5)????? Please do not post your articles, pictures and videos to the mailing list or the existing site, instead, email it directly to one of the individuals listed in the CC line above (Robert Krausert, Robert Killen, or Robert Braibish). ? Finally, we need to mention that depending on our ability to process the submissions we receive, we may not get all content added to the site for the debut.? Also, we as a development team reserve the right to not post information, especially if we have concerns of copyright.? If we have issues with a submission we will contact you to discuss the available options. That?s it, the next step is yours, and we?d love to hear from you. Sincerely, The RocketsNW Site Development team From jhadv at pacifier.com Sat Oct 31 12:33:07 2009 From: jhadv at pacifier.com (Paul Bogdanich) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 12:33:07 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Aries I-X In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20091031123142.00c43418@mail.iinet.com> >We've all noticed that the larger diameter motors are easier to assemble >but this is ridiculous! Quite the picture. Also it looks like the first 10 inches or so differs from the rest of the grain. Probably a little something to give it that kick off the pad. From MartyWeiser at comcast.net Sat Oct 31 16:45:08 2009 From: MartyWeiser at comcast.net (Marty Weiser) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 16:45:08 -0700 Subject: [RocketsNW] Aries I-X In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20091031123142.00c43418@mail.iinet.com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20091031123142.00c43418@mail.iinet.com> Message-ID: <00a901ca5a84$2eb7a290$8c26e7b0$@net> Based upon the promo video that someone posted a while back it is the most of the top grain that is a star grain to give it the extra kick. - Marty -----Original Message----- From: rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com [mailto:rockets-bounces at rocketsnw.com] On Behalf Of Paul Bogdanich Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2009 12:33 PM To: rockets at rocketsnw.com Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] Aries I-X >We've all noticed that the larger diameter motors are easier to assemble >but this is ridiculous! Quite the picture. Also it looks like the first 10 inches or so differs from the rest of the grain. Probably a little something to give it that kick off the pad. _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets From cpovercg at rocketmail.com Sat Oct 31 17:30:50 2009 From: cpovercg at rocketmail.com (Robert Braibish) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 17:30:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RocketsNW] The New RocketsNW Web Site In-Reply-To: References: <681081.22900.qm@web112915.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <619547.7167.qm@web112910.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Well, I thought I had three "CC" addresses on?email, but just in case something is not right, ?here are the addresses: Robert Braibish (cpovercg at rocketmail.com) Robert Killen (robert.killen at yahoo.com) Robert Krausert (lawndart.robert at gmail.com) ________________________________ From: Jeff Moore To: Robert Braibish Sent: Sat, October 31, 2009 12:54:26 PM Subject: Re: [RocketsNW] The New RocketsNW Web Site Hi Robert, There wasn't a CC field to your email so no one to send anything to except of course you! Jeff Moore BORG ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Braibish" To: Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2009 12:26 PM Subject: [RocketsNW] The New RocketsNW Web Site Hello everyone. I am sending this message out to the group on behalf of the RocketsNW site development team. As you may recall a handful of us are putting together a new RocketsNW web site and we have made some really great progress. Though we do not have a specific start-date we will be kicking things off soon. Our efforts are currently focused on two main areas: building on what is great about the existing site - a location to share your movies and pictures of all things rocketry, but to make it easier to use, and organized in a logical manner. Secondly creating a website that is also a wealth of topical, relevant content. Content that will include everything from launch reports and how-to tutorials to a regional calendar and links to other regional and national sites and resources. In many ways, we are trying to capture the volumes of knowledge and experience that shows up every day on the mailing list posts. To that end, we would like to ask you for some help. We are hoping to hit the ground running when the new site is introduced but to do so, we need content from you. We are looking for submissions on all topics about rocketry. Below is a short list to give you an idea of what we are looking for. Write-ups of your clubs latest event, or about one coming up, or, if you have it, something about a favorite past event. Lessons learned from your latest success, or? failure. A List of active links to your favorite websites, there is a lot of great information out there, help us share it. A tutorial or guide on any rocketry topic; recovery? avionics? tools and techniques? you name it. Any subject that has something to do with rocketry, we want to hear about it from you, Pictures and videos of your latest (or favorite) projects, launches, motor tests - anything rocketry. One of the great things about this region is the wide range of experience and interests within the rocketry hobby we have. Whether you launched your first rocket last week or, you have been doing this for decades we want to make this site something you can call your own and we want to hear about your experience. Another great thing is the wide range of non-rocketry knowledge in the northwest. Perhaps your interests are Woodworking or Metal work, maybe amateur radio or electronics, maybe you work in the plastics industry or graphics. All of these non-rocketry fields could be the source of many articles that would make for great content when applied to your interest in rocketry. Here are the submission requirements: 1) We would like the submissions to be original work ? as much as possible. For all information, data, pictures and videos used, that are not your own, we ask that you cite properly and give due credit. It would also be a good idea to contact the owner of the work/media and discuss your intent. 2) It should have something to do with the hobby of rocketry. 3) Submissions can be short or long, but do your best to keep them relevant and on topic. We also ask that for articles with a mix of media (text, with pictures or video etc.) that the submission be as ?complete? as possible. There are just a few of us putting this information on the site and the less editing we have to do, the more content we will be able to upload. 4) If you have content on a personal web page or are a vendor/purveyor of rocketry stuff, and would like to share information, or be represented, let us know. We will try to develop the best way for that to happen. 5) Please do not post your articles, pictures and videos to the mailing list or the existing site, instead, email it directly to one of the individuals listed in the CC line above (Robert Krausert, Robert Killen, or Robert Braibish). Finally, we need to mention that depending on our ability to process the submissions we receive, we may not get all content added to the site for the debut. Also, we as a development team reserve the right to not post information, especially if we have concerns of copyright. If we have issues with a submission we will contact you to discuss the available options. That?s it, the next step is yours, and we?d love to hear from you. Sincerely, The RocketsNW Site Development team _______________________________________________ Rockets mailing list Rockets at rocketsnw.com http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets