NARAM pics - Day Three

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

Monday was a much slower paced day on the sport range, and MAN, was it hot! One kid rode his bike there and was puking by the RSO tent before lunch. They eventually called an ambulance for him. Some neat flights of clones and originals. Once again, the pictures say it better.

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

And a few more from Day Three. The Q Modeling kits have had some impressive flights so far, but some lousy luck at the same time. The Mars Snooper treed itself after a sideways boost and a Rogue took a beating yesterday when the chute didn't deploy. They seem to have issues getting the chute to eject. The Saturn V here belongs to Pittsburgh's Jerry Krauss, who has been one of my best customers, flying a carload of originals. :cool:

[Ltvscout]

Monday was a much slower paced day on the sport range, and MAN, was it hot! One kid rode his bike there and was puking by the RSO tent before lunch. They eventually called an ambulance for him. Some neat flights of clones and originals. Once again, the pictures say it better.
Oooo, I'll bet that smelled good. ;)

How did Jim Flis's huge styrofoam cup rocket fly?

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

Oooo, I'll bet that smelled good. ;)

How did Jim Flis's huge styrofoam cup rocket fly?

Dudley flew fine, but the nding was a little rough. One of the legs broke off of the big Porta-Pad, but no one knows exactly how. I think it got hung up a little and lifted with the rocket.

[Doug Sams]

One of the legs broke off of the big Porta-Pad, but no one knows exactly how. I think it got hung up a little and lifted with the rocket.Tell us more about the big Porta-Pad. It's pretty kewl. Whose was it? There's a faint idea in the cobwebs of my mind that I've seen that thing before, but I'm not sure. I'm kinda inspired to wanna build one, but I already have way too many of those kind of ideas/projects that don't really advance my state of the art :(

For example, I've got this idea for a three motor cluster (BT-60) with three one-finned boosters. The boosters will use flutter recovery sorta like the Estes Tornado. The sustainer will use an xNC-60AH (ie, Omega style) NC. I've got both a plastic one and a balsa (BMS) one. Anyway, I started playing with it in Rocksim, but in an upscale form using three 24mm motors and Firefox's RTB-225 (2.25" id). It's there that I found yet another Rocksim "feature" <grrrr>

Anyway, if I was in the classroom, the teacher would be slapping me for daydreaming when I should be focussed on the my L2 projects. They're both getting to the lots-of-sanding stage, and I've been nursing a cold for over a week now, and am in no mood to be breathing sanding dust lately.

Hope you're having fun at Naram, Bill. The field looks awesome, and the weather superb.

BR,
Doug

[JRThro]

Monday was a much slower paced day on the sport range, and MAN, was it hot! One kid rode his bike there and was puking by the RSO tent before lunch. They eventually called an ambulance for him. Some neat flights of clones and originals. Once again, the pictures say it better.
Is there a medical or first aid tent there, or is it just, "Hey, this kid keeps puking. Think we should do anything about it?"

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

Tell us more about the big Porta-Pad. It's pretty kewl. Whose was it? There's a faint idea in the cobwebs of my mind that I've seen that thing before, but I'm not sure. I'm kinda inspired to wanna build one, but I already have way too many of those kind of ideas/projects that don't really advance my state of the art :(

For example, I've got this idea for a three motor cluster (BT-60) with three one-finned boosters. The boosters will use flutter recovery sorta like the Estes Tornado. The sustainer will use an xNC-60AH (ie, Omega style) NC. I've got both a plastic one and a balsa (BMS) one. Anyway, I started playing with it in Rocksim, but in an upscale form using three 24mm motors and Firefox's RTB-225 (2.25" id). It's there that I found yet another Rocksim "feature" <grrrr>

Anyway, if I was in the classroom, the teacher would be slapping me for daydreaming when I should be focussed on the my L2 projects. They're both getting to the lots-of-sanding stage, and I've been nursing a cold for over a week now, and am in no mood to be breathing sanding dust lately.

Hope you're having fun at Naram, Bill. The field looks awesome, and the weather superb.

BR,
Doug

The Porta-Pad belongs to Jim Flis. It's a pretty amazing looking project. Dead on a 1:1 pad.
As for fun, I've yet to fly anything. I've been RSO'ing for four days straight. I can't get there until after lunch tomorrow, so I'll do lunch relief and fly a few if the opportunity presents itself. Despite the constant work, I've been having a good time. The only gripes I've had have come when some people have traipsed off into the brush for an hour and left their kids for us to look after. The RSO job is one I take seriously and I think it's an insult for some airhead to consider us glorified babysitters. Granted, there's a need for shade on the field, but if you don't have enough sense to bring a canopy, that's your tough luck. The LCO/RSO tent isn't a place to hang out underfoot in for your personal comfort. Then again, that's one man's opinion. (He happens to be right, but it's still an opinion. ;) )

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

Is there a medical or first aid tent there, or is it just, "Hey, this kid keeps puking. Think we should do anything about it?"

No medical/aid tent on the field. He was sent into the shade by one of the NAR elders, and I believe someone over where he went eventually called the life squad.
I did make it a point to say "Some kid puked there. You might want to move." :rolleyes:
Same thing happened to me a few weeks ago. Once you get to feeling bad, you're screwed. No amount of fluid intake will help you catch back up. :(

[qmodeling]

NERRF this pasted June we had 13 flights with no deployment issues. The only issues we had were a CATO that ultimately did in our MRS-STILETTO, deploying our MRS-NIKEX into a drainage ditch a 1 million to 1 shot given the acreage out there, and almost losing our MRS-WACC because we decided to play with the high power dudes and shoot it off with a F21. Again we had no deployment issues that day.

A month and a half later we go to NARAM and out of 12 flights we had 4 poor ejections where the parachute was left stuck in the tip of the Main Body Tube. This all started happening on Monday the 3rd day of flying. The previous two days we didn’t have one half deployment issue, but did have a couple of tangled deployments that righted at the last second.

It all started on the third day of flights when we decided to do parallel testing of our MRS-WACC and MRS-ROGUE. We wanted to climb the ladder of impulse from C to E. We started out with Estes C11-3, motors we have successfully flown the MRS-WACC and MRS-ROGUE with before.

Both flights were great until the parachutes didn’t fully eject out of the Main Body Tubes. The Nose Cones were ejected but not the recovery systems. The ejection charges even sounded weak. Both rockets hit the ground hard but survived. With just a little field repair both rockets were able to continue the testing.

Next we threw D12-5’s into each rocket. Again the flights were great until the parachutes didn’t fully eject. About 50’ from the ground the MRS-WACC chute did emerge and landed under deployment. The MRS-ROGUE took another beating. This time no field repair was necessary, but we decided to stop the testing before our luck totally ran out.

We moved onto just having fun doing some sports flying starting with our soon to be release MRS-ANDROMEDA. This beauty stands at over 72” tall and is Prototype #2. A side note we still have Prototype #1, but we made some minor mods based on our 4th of July testing. We flew Prototype #2 twice at NARAM 47 and had two great spectacular flights with absolutely no damage. The only downer was forgetting to add tape to the nose cone to create a tight fit for flight (ejection happens at the mid point). Again we couldn’t ask for better flights.

We then flew the MRS-SNOOPER on a E9-4. We can’t explain the arc flight it took or again why the parachute didn’t fully come out of the Main Body Tube. Unfortunately it landed in a un-climb-able tree way to high for a telescoping pole. Chan Stevens and crew now have a free MRS-SNOOPER if they get the fire department back to get it out of the tree.

The deployment issues we had were simply weird. We have been flying our kits since June of 2002 and never had half deployment issues. We have had tangled chutes, broken shock cords, and the host of other deployment horrors as you run through various test plans and try to avoid Mr. Murphy, but not half deployment issues. The MRS-WACC and MRS-ROGUE our BT-60 designs employing 18” chutes and 6” Nomex heat shields. The MRS-SNOOPER is a BT-60 design employing a 30” chute and 9” Nomex heat shield. Now before we start thinking that maybe the recovery systems are packed to tight the MRS-ANDROMEDA is a BT-60 design with BT-52 Main Body Tubing and we pack a 30” chute and 9” Nomex heat shield in the Main Body Tube.

Yes we had deployment issues, but we were definately impressed with our engine mount engineering. You don't typically walk away from dead plumets able to fly again. The MRS-WACC and MRS-ROGUE did. We however are hoping the vine on the tree takes it over.

So we have the following questions:

- Do ejection charges vary?

-Can a lose recovery system enable enough gas to pass by to prevent it from fully ejecting?

- Does it make sense to tie the parachute closer to the nose cone so that when it pops off it helps pull the chute out?

- Do main body tubes need to be cleaned so often and powdered?

- Should we include baffles in all our kits to make a parachute compartment near the nose? We do in our taller designs like the MRS-STILETTO and MRS-NIKEX.

- Does Murphy just show up at events like NARAM 47 to embarrass you?

Thanks for any input.

Tom Quinn
QModeling, President/Sales

[BobCox]

So we have the following questions:
-Do ejection charges vary?
Definitely. I had an E9 engine that barely had enough oomph to break the clay cap that covers the ejection charge. It was just enough to blow the nose off my Executioner, but not enough to eject the chute. It free-fell a long ways until finally the drag on the nose cone was enough to pull the chute free and inflate about 100 feet up.

-Can a lose recovery system enable enough gas to pass by to prevent it from fully ejecting?
Yes. Are you using the original 30-inch chutes on the WACC and ROGUE, or did you switch to the new 18-inch? The 30-inch is a pretty snug fit in a BT-60 and is less likely to allow gas to flow past. The 18-inch might let the gas pass, but it should be easier for the nose cone momentum to pull it free.

- Does it make sense to tie the parachute closer to the nose cone so that when it pops off it helps pull the chute out?
Yes. See my first answer.

- Do main body tubes need to be cleaned so often and powdered?
It seems like it wouldn't hurt, but it shouldn't be necessary.

- Should we include baffles in all our kits to make a parachute compartment near the nose? We do in our taller designs like the MRS-STILETTO and MRS-NIKEX.
When you say baffles, you mean a ledge to keep the chute near the nose, not a ducted port to reroute and cool the ejection gas. I wouldn't think it would be necessary on the WACC or ROGUE, but it might not hurt.

- Does Murphy just show up at events like NARAM 47 to embarrass you?
No, he shows up everywhere all the time. But he puts in extended guest appearances at big events, like Santa Claus in a shopping mall in December.

[qmodeling]

No the MRS-ROGUE and MRS-WACC had the 18" chute. The MRS-SNOOPER had a 30" chute and again the MRS-ANDROMEDA had a 30" chute packed into a BT-52 tube.


By baffle I mean supplying a parachute C-Ring to form a parachute compartment. My thinking here is the recovery system won't fall to the rear of the tube during acceleration and thus it will be closer to the nose cone.

Does it make sense to move the snap ring closer to the nose cone? Instead of at the shock cord 1/3 spot maybe 8" away?


Again it just seemed like either the Estes engines didn't have enough poop or the gases were just blowing by. The only reason I don't go for the gases going by is because at NERRF we didn't have any trouble and the MRS-SNOOPER was a 30" recovery system pack in a BT-60 tube and it still didn't come out.

[BobCox]

No the MRS-ROGUE and MRS-WACC had the 18" chute. The MRS-SNOOPER had a 30" chute and again the MRS-ANDROMEDA had a 30" chute packed into a BT-52 tube.
I'm amazed that you fit the 30-inch chute package into a BT-52. It's already a snug fit in a BT-60. It must be packed like a flauta (http://www.answers.com/topic/flauta) instead of a burrito, huh?

Does it make sense to move the snap ring closer to the nose cone? Instead of at the shock cord 1/3 spot maybe 8" away?
That might help pull the chute out of the body. However, on some of my other rockets I found that clipping the chute close to the nose cone increases the likelihood that the nose cone will pass between the shroud lines and cause them to partially tangle.

Q: When the chute got stuck in the body, was the entire recovery package stuck? Did the bundle come out partway? Did any of the shroud lines get pulled free or were they still wrapped up inside the heat shield?

Again it just seemed like either the Estes engines didn't have enough poop or the gases were just blowing by. The only reason I don't go for the gases going by is because at NERRF we didn't have any trouble and the MRS-SNOOPER was a 30" recovery system pack in a BT-60 tube and it still didn't come out.
Could the humidity make a difference? I wonder if humidity would make the tubing swell resulting in a tighter nose cone fit. Or maybe it would make the interior of the tubing "sticky" so that the chute package wouldn't slide as easily.

[Doug Sams]

Again it just seemed like either the Estes engines didn't have enough poop or the gases were just blowing by. The only reason I don't go for the gases going by is because at NERRF we didn't have any trouble and the MRS-SNOOPER was a 30" recovery system pack in a BT-60 tube and it still didn't come out.I've had problems with one rocket that seemed to crash every other flight. The chute seemed to just hug the wall and let the ejection charge go by. It must have wrecked three or four times with the nosecone popped but the laundry still inside.

My experience with the new 24mm motors (C11s, E9s and recent vintage D12s) is that they have plenty of oomph in the ejection charges. Way plenty. Not that you couldn't have gotten some bad ones, but I think the problem may lie elsewhere.

How good of a seal are you getting in the MMT? Could some of the ejection gases be coming out around the motor? It doesn't take too much of a leak to reduce the back pressure on the BP ejection charge resulting in a poor burn and a wimpy ejection. That can be cured with one or two wraps of tape.

Another thought is to use more wadding. Several sheets layered to form a piston of sorts under the laundry.

You mentioned where to connect the chute. I prefer to connect it right at the NC. If the NC is out, then the suspension lines should be, too. Furthermore, borrowing from HPR, I pack the chute on top of the shock cord so that it's the first thing out after the NC. This is contrary to ancient doctrine, but I've never come up with reasonable explanation why the shock cord should be on top of the chute.

My two cents. YMMV.

Doug

[BobCox]

My experience with the new 24mm motors (C11s, E9s and recent vintage D12s) is that they have plenty of oomph in the ejection charges. Way plenty. Not that you couldn't have gotten some bad ones, but I think the problem may lie elsewhere.
I'd agree with you that MOST Estes 24mm motors have an excess of ejection charge. I have seen one E9 that didn't, though, and I have photos to prove it.

Another thought is to use more wadding. Several sheets layered to form a piston of sorts under the laundry.
No wadding was used. QModeling kits use a Nomex heat shield wrapped around the chute like a burrito. It fills the body tube pretty full. I doubt that more wadding would help.

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

How good of a seal are you getting in the MMT? Could some of the ejection gases be coming out around the motor? It doesn't take too much of a leak to reduce the back pressure on the BP ejection charge resulting in a poor burn and a wimpy ejection. That can be cured with one or two wraps of tape.

This is along the lines of what I was thinking also. The mounts look great, but it seems that they'd pose a higher than normal risk of exhaust leak. I've never built one, mind you, but I've seen all the pics associated with the reviews.
Like Doug says, YMMV. ;)

[BobCox]

This is along the lines of what I was thinking also. The mounts look great, but it seems that they'd pose a higher than normal risk of exhaust leak.
I've never built one, mind you, but I've seen all the pics associated with the reviews.
I've built three of them -- one BT-60 and two BT-80 designs. I don't know why they would be any more prone to ejection leak than any other design. The balsa "cage" around the mount has lots of holes to cut the weight, but both ends are covered by plates that are sealed to the motor tube and main body tube. The only leakage path they should have is around the engine itself.

[Doug Sams]

I don't know why they would be any more prone to ejection leak than any other design. The balsa "cage" around the mount has lots of holes to cut the weight, but both ends are covered by plates that are sealed to the motor tube and main body tube. The only leakage path they should have is around the engine itself.Yes, around the motor, that's what I was talking about. Some of the 3rd party, thick walled motor tubes have slightly larger inside diameters. This makes it easier to insert the sometimes "fat" BP motors, but can also result in a loose fit for the non-fat ones. A couple wraps of tape on the motor will seal this up. The first one that comes to mind is the foil lined Totally Tubular T-50mf (IIRC). It's definitely bigger inside than an Estes BT-50.

Doug

PS, please don't anyone get me wrong. I truly like the thick walled 24mm tubes. They're much more robust than the 0.013" walled BT-50 (in MMT applications). But a little extra prep may be required when using them. DS.

[jflis]

Tell us more about the big Porta-Pad. It's pretty kewl. Whose was it? There's a faint idea in the cobwebs of my mind that I've seen that thing before, but I'm not sure.


That's my pad. It's a 3.5:1 upscale port-a-pad. I built it years ago as I had built a collection of upscale Estes kits in the 3:1 - 4:1 ratio and wanted a pad to fly them on :)

You may have seen it if you ever attened Pearl River MODRoc convention in NY or visited my personal web site. You can see a picture of it here:

http://jflis.com/hobbies/rocketry/photos/collection.jpg

:D

[Doug Sams]

You may have seen it if you ever attened Pearl River MODRoc convention in NY or visited my personal web site. You can see a picture of it here: Jim, I may have seen it on your site, likely because someone posted a link on one of the rocketry forums.

I've never been there, but one of my favorite fraternity brothers at Kentucky was a Pearl River native.

Doug