- This topic has 124 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 3 months ago by
Chris LaPanse.
Chris LaPanse.-
Posts
-
Anonymous
No restrictions, Conway!
tony
I’m new here…and have caught the end of this thread. One thing about altitude junkies is that they are not shy about showing you what they’ve come up with. It’s hard to squeeze out a few extra hundred feet out of rockets. It takes the right launch site, weather, building techniques, motor and rocket to break an existing record. For awhile the TRA records were pretty stagnant. But with the recent introduction of some new motor manufactures Ellis, AMW and others has introduced new possibilities. I began to play around with a boosted dart until I found out they are not allowed for TRA records. Boosted darts would introduce more new life into the single motor class. As for 100K. Dave Triano and Frank did a Q (8″) a couple of years ago at Balls and got a reported 87K. Not sure if they ever recovered the rocket. Can you get a 100K with commercial motors? I think so..it will need to be a 2 or 3 stage rocket. Here is a link to a group project. http://www.to100k.org/ . In the same lines as John was saying..we’ve done two test flights..no BP in the charges and dead batteries cost the group a few thousand dollars. It’s the small things that get you. We have another test flight and then the “big” (O-5100 – M1000) flight Planned for Aug 4. Best advise to those looking to be ‘altitude junkies’ is to seek out those that are, ask lots of questions learn the techniques and then go for it. Don’t get bummed out if the flight does not go as planned..pick-up the pieces and try again and again!
TonyConway Stevens
Glad to have you here tony. Welcome aboard. Yes I know of the Q project you speak. The 100K+ flight I speak of was the OuR project. It was a full R motor. It was done by Paul Robinson, Ken Mizoi, Frank Kosdon and some others. Now it did not get recovered..BUT they know where it is at as well as the have actual data transmission and video from onboard that was all transmitted to the ground. Really awesome deal. in fact I belive there is video of this on one of the DVD’s you can buy from BALLS. Not sure wich one but if I find it I will buy a copy. You are absolutly correct about the cynical nature of doing altitude. That is why I so well belive that doing it is harder then most give credit for. Eventually some day My goal Like JW is to atleast push the 50K area. After that who knows.
Anonymous
It’s hard to squeeze out a few extra hundred feet out of rockets. It takes the right launch site, weather, building techniques, motor and rocket to break an existing record.
Precisely. Right now I have two boosts that have exceeded TRA records, but not by the 2% requirement. You can wring and tweak and coax a few feet here and there; at some point, it gets pretty tight!
denverdoc
As I know about the flights at LDRS including the L3 cert (BTW to mention that guy that certed has tried several times before with a Minimum diameter N only to shred it a few of those times. Yes it was composite everytime so exactly my point of the difficulty) Besides look at the amount of people at LDRS that have the motor capabillity to fly to that altitude and or set out to attempt and only a hand few..(3 at this particular event) that actually do get there. If it were really easy many many more would do it. Sorry for my difference of opinion but Its not as easy as it seems and that is what makes doing those altitudes such a thrill. It May look it may think it to be black and white down right easy. but its not. Ive heard from others with much more experince then most here posting about it. People like JW and some others nationally to say a few that have made attempts or even to those heights. Ive even been able to sit down and talk face to face to persons that have flown to 100K+. They all say the same thing. dont get caught up in thinking its really easy.. Its deceptive and quite tough.
Obviously just using composites is not enuf–I don’t know the details of Jim’s earlier attempts but my guess is that they began with FWFG tubing, a material many naively believe to be Mach 2+ capable. In fact I have heard more times than once FG is as strong as CF from very seasoned rocket guys. But why try for a ne plus ultra shot w/o getting some experience first. It was Icarus like approach and he was punished for his hubris, but in the end had the last word.
Perhaps, and I know this ain’t your cup of tea, that part of the problem in trying to break 30K with a single motor, is that you just have to roast it.
I’ve simmed this problem from multiple approaches, and to keep the stresses, including heat, down, you need to fly below M2, preferably about M1.8 or so. Then your epoxy doen’t melt, either by heat transfer from the casing or frictional heating. Thats the premise of my current project, in fact I’m sacrificing altitude by not drag separating, coasting until below transonic, etc just to keep the profile mellow. I believe this is a well thought out plan, and will bet anyone a steak dinner I make it to 25k at Balls, even steven, and if I break 30K, I get to pick the vendor, otherwise Outback. 😛
John SConway Stevens
Obviously just using composites is not enuf–I don’t know the details of Jim’s earlier attempts but my guess is that they began with FWFG tubing, a material many naively believe to be Mach 2+ capable. In fact I have heard more times than once FG is as strong as CF from very seasoned rocket guys. But why try for a ne plus ultra shot w/o getting some experience first. It was Icarus like approach and he was punished for his hubris, but in the end had the last word.
Perhaps, and I know this ain’t your cup of tea, that part of the problem in trying to break 30K with a single motor, is that you just have to roast it.
I’ve simmed this problem from multiple approaches, and to keep the stresses, including heat, down, you need to fly below M2, preferably about M1.8 or so. Then your epoxy doen’t melt, either by heat transfer from the casing or frictional heating. Thats the premise of my current project, in fact I’m sacrificing altitude by not drag separating, coasting until below transonic, etc just to keep the profile mellow. I believe this is a well thought out plan, and will bet anyone a steak dinner I make it to 25k at Balls, even steven, and if I break 30K, I get to pick the vendor, otherwise Outback. 😛
John SWell how he acchived his goal is inspiring.(from what I heard this was not his only CF build) Hats off to him.. BUT the fact that it went to 35K is great BUT I think unacceptable for a L3 flight and could easily cost him his Cert if the cert team followed the rules completly, But thats another subject all together. As far as FWFG being Mach 2 capabale.. Heck yes it is. Ive proven it myself with a Mach 2.2 flight myself. 3″ diameter rocket only about 7 to 8lbs and a really fast 54mm AMW engine.(when I got it back the paint was scorched and burt off from the air friction moving around it) Jim Amos flew his almost to the same size bird on the same engine with his Mpac and recorded Mach 2 and its a partial FWFG project. So yes its very possible. So I dont think there is any naive thoughts about it. CF is not the so called champion of indestructables as everyone thinks. Lb for Lb its streangth is great dont get me wrong. But I have seen several CF rockets that shreaded as easily as any. In fact the place here locally I get my CF and my Fiberglass and epxoy and stuff has told me many times that FG is as strong as CF but CF is more rigid and has a different freq of dampening the FG. I to have heard that FG is as strong as well. Infact the PHITS club proved how strong a FWFG airframe is…
John if you break 25 or even 30K my hats is off to you. Great achivement! (has to be a clean recovery) But the previous Altitude that has been in this discussion as to being easy as its so put was 50K.. You break 50K and youve got a deal on outback and the steak. But as I stated. Must be clean recovery and wittnessed.. Once I get my L3 done I do plan to start putting together a build that will take a few years . 2 to 3. Single motor. something in the P,Q or R class. Then I will go hunt me down some Big sky. I may not find the multi-staged stuff as appealing to me for the altitude as I do the shear brute power of a single motor capable to do the same but I still think they are pretty cool. I gues its just the big horsepower lover in me that comes out there.
denverdoc
Con,
And I have seen as many FWFG tubes shred at Mach 2+ as you mention surviving it–may be the vendor involved, wind shear, etc. who knows, certainly there are many variables. FWFG tubing is a great convenience and certainly more affordable than some of the more exotic stuff, and off the shelf ready to go. But having seen it come apart, I took it off my list for Mach 2 anything. Now maybe wrapped in kevlar and CF it might be close to ideal, on account of its great insulating properties and general ease of use. I would hazard a guess that a FWCF tube would be the ultimate cats meow.
But of greater curiosity is why you consider 35k unacceptable for an L3 shot? Obviously not the road either of us are following, but it was 15k under waiver, stayed within the cylinder the entire time, and passed muster with his committee. One could argue it might put spectators in danger, but any L3 shot can–personally those flying bricks of 60# plus make me more nervous, but obviously just an opinion.
John SConway Stevens
As far as tubing goes I agree that FWFG is probably not the most superior ..but its does do a great job. My preference is to Convolute made products like Convolute wound FG tubing or CF tubing. anyhow..
A far as the cert. I dont want to be jugded as a spoil sport or negative. Just pointing out what I have read and how I belive it should be read that way.(or at least how my Cert member would read it) I may say some possiblillities but in no way am I saying that is what he did or anyone would. Just a posibility.
According to the rules of the cert, the flight has to be Visible to the Cert team. Im pretty sure that at that altitude you cant see it. So how do they know it operated like it was supposed to? Did the mains come out on top on a supposed to be dual deploy flight? There are even other possibillities that I wont even begin to imagine only because i dont think anyone would do it.. but it is possiblity..just want people to think. This is why my plans for my cert flight changed and toned down from an N4000BB to a N2020WT. the difference of a 22K flight vs a 13K flight. A rocket the size of mine at 13 to 14K shoud be visable with eyesight and even more with Binoculars. Let alon I do have Video onboard recording the flight.
denverdoc
Con,
i guess we’ll have to continue to disagree, the GPS locked around apo, and we had reports on the loudspeaker system, 35k…34…33…etc until mains deployed when they were supposed to.
There was no chance he had a premature..um..event, and that rocket with its GPS, accelerometer & baro data, coupled with ground software like Google Earth probably has provided the most detailed depiction of an L3 shot, short of camera, as any that has been flown to date. I think Jim deserves a lot of credit for pulling off arguably the most masterful L3 flight ever. Frankly if your mains come out early as they did in the case of the event horizon, one would know. You got a huge chute and no descent. Its pretty obvious at even 11k. At 35, it drifts away never to be seen again.
Rocketry is about personal challenge. Choose your targets. Live with the results. Can go green, blue or black, even dbl diamond. Unless you’re putting other skiiers at risk, go for it.
JohnConway Stevens
Yes we do dissagree with this. BUT once again read what I said it states. Its states That the flight must be seen. Not heard from GPS or anything else. BUT seen to have exhibited the correct mannor for certification. Reguardless of all the techno stuff seeing is beliving is the cert rule. It very well makes sense to me. I would belive that many of the L3cc or TAP members would belive in this as well.
Anonymous
tony
Conway Stevens
denverdoc
- The forum ‘Archives 2006-2010’ is closed to new topics and replies.