 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Rockets / March 2006Aerotech G-Force experiences
At the college I work for we picked up and built an Aerotech G-Force so that it can loft a CanSat (electronic package the size of a soda can). We are planning on flying it in about 3 weeks from now, so I am just wondering what things to look out for when flying an Aerotech G-Force rocket on a G80-4T engine. The first question is, how much weight are you lifting? You might rethink the motor your planning on using...which would lead to the next question, is it built well enough to handle a larger/longer motor. H128? If you go to Aerotech's webpage, the altitude on the rocket WITHOUT any payload is only predicted to be 640' with a G80. http://www.aerotech-rocketry.com/ If you put the data into WRASP http://www.wrasp.com/ , in a similar rocket like the LOC IV, and put the weight of 32oz for the initial weight of the rocket specified from Aerotech, along with just a 1lb payload, you have 48oz to get off the ground or 4lbs. Put that into WRASP in the LOC IV and you get 524'. Your launch rod velocity is at 27.2 ft per second, so it would be better to be safe and use a long launch rod of 5' or better. Your really pushing it for a safe flight as the minimum safe ave. thrust should be 89 newtons on a 4lb rocket (4lbs*4.45*5), and the G80 only has 77.5 newtons. You might think about using an Aerotech H128 with a 6 second delay for a flight of around 964' Goodluck. -Booms > At the college I work for we picked up and built an Aerotech G-Force > so that it can loft a CanSat (electronic package the size of a soda > can). We are planning on flying it in about 3 weeks from now, so > I am just wondering what things to look out for when flying an > Aerotech G-Force rocket on a G80-4T engine. > The first question is, how much weight are you lifting? The first flight will be just the rocket itself. Second flight which might carry the Cansat itself is around the 12 to 14 ounce range. Actually I am more worried about the likeyhood of the tube zippering after ejection or the upper body section striking the lower body section giving it's on one long (very long by my experience) shock cord and the parachute is mounted on the middle of that shock cord. > Actually I am more worried about the likeyhood of the > tube zippering after ejection or the upper body section > striking the lower body section giving it's on one long > (very long by my experience) shock cord and the > parachute is mounted on the middle of that shock cord. First, the longer the shock cord, the better. Second, putting the parachute at the middle of the shock cord is a mistake -- then the top half comes down and smacks the bottom half, and bangs together all the way down. I tend to put the parachute about one-third of the distance FROM the top section -- in other words, top section, 1/3 of shock cord, parachute, 2/3 of shock cord, bottom section. This tends to keep the pieces from banging together, and allows for the bottom part (generally more robust) to touch down first. Zippering is a problem if you don't have the right timing for the delay. If you eject at (or close to) apogee, zippering is unlikely. If you're delay is too short/long, you increase the probability of a zipper. You might want to switch to a reloadable motor, and trim the delay, if you find that the single use motors don't offer quite the delay that you need. David Erbas-White Parachutes shouldn't be in the middle of a shock cord. Parachutes should be 1/3 of the way down the shock cord from the top. Do that and you shouldn't have any problems with the top hitting the bottom. A 10' shock cord should suffice for keeping things apart. If you really want to see what your rocket might do...plug the data into WRASP in a LOC IV. It's a very similar rocket even though it's shorter. The weight can be adjusted and the main similarity is the 4" dia. WRASP is free to use. You should be fine with a 4 second delay with the payload, but it could very well be too quick for the flight without the payload and cause a zipper. Best check it out in a sim. You can also try Rocksim on a free trial from Apogee if you have the patience and time to put it in. http://www.apogeerockets.com/rocksim.asp Maybe Gary has already done so and can e-mail you the Rocksim file from Aerotech. -Booms >> The first question is, how much weight are you lifting? >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > (very long by my experience) shock cord and the > parachute is mounted on the middle of that shock cord. > Parachutes shouldn't be in the middle of a shock cord. Parachutes should be > 1/3 of the way down the shock cord from the top. Do that and you shouldn't > have any problems with the top hitting the bottom. A 10' shock cord should > suffice for keeping things apart. The G-Force comes with a 18 foot shock cord, between the knots and the length of the cord that is inside of the tubes it has to be at least 16.5 feet between the two sections. >> The first question is, how much weight are you lifting? >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >(very long by my experience) shock cord and the >parachute is mounted on the middle of that shock cord. What is the replacement cost of the Cansat, including time and labor? I'd strongly recommend that you make a flight with a dummy Cansat payload of the same size and weight, and resolve any issues observed, before lofting the real payload. >>> The first question is, how much weight are you lifting? >>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > payload of the same size and weight, and resolve any issues observed, > before lofting the real payload. All good comments. I replaced the fins on mine with plywood after breaking the tips off two of them when the stuck in the dirt. Mine is far from stock. It has a 38 mm motor mount, four inch diameter ejection baffle, and instead of paint, I used Monokote for the finish. Well, the nose cone is painted. I reinforced the top of the body tube with a two inch wide strip of four ounce glass cloth applied with thin CA glue, and finished off with thick CA rubbed in with a glove covered finger. It helps prevent zippers and can hardly be seen under the Monokote. Here's a short video on a Loki I405 motor. http://sears572.com/albums/2005-12-10Videos/John_Stein_Loki_Motor_I405.mpg Here http://www.pratthobbies.com/products.asp?cat=10 is Doug's "CANSAT". Although they may be using something else as that term is becoming a bit generic: like Kleenex... 8) Will ... > What is the replacement cost of the Cansat, including time and labor? > I'd strongly recommend that you make a flight with a dummy Cansat > payload of the same size and weight, and resolve any issues observed, > before lofting the real payload.  SignatureWill Marchant, NAR 13356, Tripoli 10125 L3 kc6rol@amsat.org http://www.spaceflightsoftware.com/will/ Hi Helen, With a 12-14 ounce CanSat stuck in it and the l/d of a G-Force, my hunch is that the G-Force will probably be more apt to turn into the wind as it lumbers up there. Play the wind? Best, Andy > At the college I work for we picked up and built an Aerotech G-Force > so that it can loft a CanSat (electronic package the size of a soda > can). We are planning on flying it in about 3 weeks from now, so > I am just wondering what things to look out for when flying an > Aerotech G-Force rocket on a G80-4T engine. Long time, no hear. Welcome back! Don't forget that this rocket will need FAA notification at a minimum. if it's over 1500g not only is a waiver required, but it's subject to HPR rules including certification, even though it's only got a G motor in it. I seem to disagree with common practice. I prefer to attach my chute direct to the nose cone / payload section, rather to the middle of the shock cord. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org S&T is becoming this decades Steve Weaver! >I seem to disagree with common practice. I prefer to attach my chute direct >to the nose cone / payload section, rather to the middle of the shock cord. > > I don't always do it the way I outlined, sometimes I do it the way you've defined it as well. Can't really say I have a clear definition of why/when I do either way, other than by gut feel -- not something I've ever thought about, but I guess I really should... <G> David Erbas-White http://home.flash.net/~samily/stuff/HPR_metric8.pdf Signature"""Remove "zorch" from address (2 places) to reply. http://www.sirius.com/ >> At the college I work for we picked up and built an Aerotech G-Force >> so that it can loft a CanSat (electronic package the size of a soda [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I seem to disagree with common practice. I prefer to attach my chute direct > to the nose cone / payload section, rather to the middle of the shock cord. > In article <Pine.BSI.4.61.0602271140540.28198@malasada.lava.net>, Helen Rapozo > > I am just wondering what things to look out for when flying an [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > it's over 1500g not only is a waiver required, but it's subject to HPR rules > including certification, even though it's only got a G motor in it. Where is it written; rockets exceeding 1500g, using a g motor, especially a G80 Blue Thunder, require HPR certification ?? Maybe I missed it, or were you talking about motor certification??? > I seem to disagree with common practice. I prefer to attach my chute direct > to the nose cone / payload section, rather to the middle of the shock cord. I agree with this, I have seen to many tangled recovery's, with folks using the middle attachment, especially dual system recovery deployment. >>In article <Pine.BSI.4.61.0602271140540.28198@malasada.lava.net>, Helen Rapozo >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > especially a G80 Blue Thunder, require HPR certification ?? Maybe I > missed it, or were you talking about motor certification??? http://nar.org/NARmodeltypes.html Where Is The Line Between Model and High Power Rocketry? A rocket exceeds the definition of a model rocket under NFPA 1122 and becomes a high power rocket under NFPA 1127 if it: * Uses a motor with more than 160 Newton-seconds of total impulse (an"H" motor or larger) or multiple motors that all together exceed 320 Newton-seconds; * Uses a motor with more than 80 Newtons average thrust (see rocket motor coding); * Weighs more than 1,500 grams including motor(s); or * Includes any airframe parts of ductile metal. >>I seem to disagree with common practice. I prefer to attach my chute direct >>to the nose cone / payload section, rather to the middle of the shock cord. > > I agree with this, I have seen to many tangled recovery's, with folks > using the middle attachment, especially dual system recovery deployment. > >>In article <Pine.BSI.4.61.0602271140540.28198@malasada.lava.net>, Helen Rapozo > >> [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > * Weighs more than 1,500 grams including motor(s); or > * Includes any airframe parts of ductile metal. I think you missed my point on HPR certification requirements. I do not believe an A/T G80T exceeds 160ns total or 80ns average thrust.. Therefore, no HPR certification is required to use this motor in any size rocket, (never has been to my knowledge). FAA notification; yes, but only if the total weight of the loaded rocket is at or exceeds 1500g. A 1500g or larger rocket with a A/T G80T needs a FAA notification for sure.. However, HPR certification of the individual is not a requirement. Fred >>>>In article <Pine.BSI.4.61.0602271140540.28198@malasada.lava.net>, Helen Rapozo >>>> [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > Fred Hi Fred: I took a look in NFPA 1127 and any rocket that masses over 1500g at liftoff is, by NFPA 1127 definition, a high power rocket. The motor doesn't matter. And NFPA 1127 says only a certified user may launch a high power rocket. A certified user is a person recognized by a national organization to use high power motors. That means you have to have at least an L1. Therefore you must have at least an L1 to launch a rocket massing more than 1500g at liftoff regardless of motor. I haven't figured out how many MicroMaxx motors you need to cluster to get over the 125g limit to also make it a high power rocket... 8) Best wishes, Will SignatureWill Marchant, NAR 13356, Tripoli 10125 L3 kc6rol@amsat.org http://www.spaceflightsoftware.com/will/ Since this is becoming anal retentive, why don't you verify if universities even require the HPR certification since I know they don't require them to have LEUP's to even buy M motors. They are only required to have the proper storage. Geesh, get over it people. All they need to do is call in an FAR 101 and fly the damn thing. Give em' a break. -Booms >>>>>In article <Pine.BSI.4.61.0602271140540.28198@malasada.lava.net>, Helen >>>>>Rapozo [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > Best wishes, > Will > Since this is becoming anal retentive, why don't you verify if universities > even require the HPR certification since I know they don't require them to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > -Booms Hey Booms, Get over what?? If you don't like the topic why bother responding?? Talk about anal retentive..(:-) Fred > > I think you missed my point on HPR certification requirements. I do not > > believe an A/T G80T exceeds 160ns total or 80ns average thrust.. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Will Marchant, NAR 13356, Tripoli 10125 L3 > kc6rol@amsat.org http://www.spaceflightsoftware.com/will/ While you may be correct in your literal interpitation, HPR cert to launch a A/T G80T powered rocket, regardless of size, has not been the practice, any place I have launched. In any case, certification is only required for a single motor that ventures into the H range. "Single Motor size" is the definer for HPR cert requirements, NAR or TRA. Fred > While you may be correct in your literal interpitation, HPR cert to > launch a A/T G80T powered rocket, regardless of size, has not been the > practice, any place I have launched. In any case, certification is only > required for a single motor that ventures into the H range. "Single > Motor size" is the definer for HPR cert requirements, NAR or TRA. You are wrong. if launches are being run that way where you are, be they NAR or TRA, they too are wrong. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org S&T is becoming this decades Steve Weaver! > > While you may be correct in your literal interpitation, HPR cert to > > launch a A/T G80T powered rocket, regardless of size, has not been the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > -- > Bob Kaplow Bob, Are you telling me: "at your launches, someone wants to launch a a AT Baracuda ona AT G80-T, a rocket that weighs in at more than 1500g loaded, (at least mine soes), the individual can only launch if the individual is HPR cert level 1 or better"??? Say it isn't so Bob..... Fred Reading the NAR Model rocketry safety codes: http://nar.org/NARmrsc.html Size. My model rocket will not weigh more than 1,500 grams (53 ounces) at liftoff and will not contain more than 125 grams (4.4 ounces) of propellant or 320 N-sec (71.9 pound-seconds) of total impulse. If my model rocket weighs more than one pound (453 grams) at liftoff or has more than four ounces (113 grams) of propellant, I will check and comply with Federal Aviation Administration regulations before flying. To me that reads that any rocket that weighs more than 1500g (53oz) does not fall under the model rocketry safety guidelines. The only other guideline for NAR is the HPR guidelines. Those guidelines are: http://nar.org/NARhpsc.html # Weight and Power Limits. My rocket will weigh no more than the motor manufacturer's recommended maximum liftoff weight for the motors used, or I will use motors recommended by the manufacturer of the rocket kit. My high power rocket will be propelled by rocket motors that produce no more than 40,960 Newton-seconds (9,204 pound-seconds) of total impulse. I don't see a minumum weight or a maximum. Just the maximum that the motor manufacterer recommends. That covers NAR's guidelines. I can't speak for TRA nor for the FAA (or the BATFE, not that they should really care) -Aaron http://home.flash.net/~samily/stuff/HPR_metric8.pdf BOOKMARK READ Signature-Fred Shecter remove zorch two places to reply Current eBay auctions: http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQfgtpZ1QQfrppZ25QQfsooZ1QQfsopZ1QQsassZshreadvector Join the Revolution: http://www.sirius.com > Reading the NAR Model rocketry safety codes: > http://nar.org/NARmrsc.html [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > -Aaron And whom is the source of that PDF, web page please.. > http://home.flash.net/~samily/stuff/HPR_metric8.pdf > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > -Fred Shecter One more thing; FAA has no authority and could care less about HPR certification as this pamphlet seems to imply, especially in the explanation of the fifth line. No mention of certification for rocketry launching is mentioned, anywhere in FAR 101. Fred W > And whom is the source of that PDF, web page please.. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > > > -Fred Shecter > Reading the NAR Model rocketry safety codes: > http://nar.org/NARmrsc.html [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > -Aaron Your right Aaron, my bad -- 1500 grams or greater is a high power rocket and must be launched as such. I wasn't thinking when I used the Barracuda loaded with a G80, as it only weighs in at slightly over 1lb -- I just checked it. However, no mater the total weight, less than 1500g or greater than, you don't need HPR certification to launch the darn thing on a G80T. Hell, before I was HPR certified, (several years ago), I launched my LOC Mini-Mag on AT G80-4T motors on several occasions; and yes it was at wavered launches, but no one was concerned about my lack of cert level, just a lot of, "listen to that thing roar". It only went about 500' + or -, but it got there with authority. Fred Before my level 1 cert, I walked right up to 3.3lbs (1500g) line, but never crossed it. Now that I have my level 2 cert, I'm in the pre-build stages of a 40+ pound monster. (near 1/2 scale patriot, if anyone cares) that I'll send up on an A/T K1275 If you built a rocket that used 2 A/T G80T motors, you'd still be able to launch it without a cert assuming that the rocket was less than 3.3lbs (1500g) and you had the proper FAA notification. The Aerotech website says that a G80T has 120 N-sec of thrust. 2 of these would put a rocket at 240N-sec, well below the 320N-sec limit. ( http://www.aerotech-rocketry.com/customersite/resource_library/Certification_Doc uments/NAR/single-use/29mm_mr_su/g80t_nar_cert.pdf ) Sorry for the long link. I don't see what the big problem is. The Aerotech website for the G-Force says the dry weight of the rocket is 32 oz. You can add 21 oz of motor and payload before you reach the magical 53 oz limit. It falls below the limits for cert. If it will be stable on that motor, launch and enjoy! -Aaron > I don't see what the big problem is. The Aerotech website for the > G-Force says the dry weight of the rocket is 32 oz. You can add 21 oz > of motor and payload before you reach the magical 53 oz limit. It > falls below the limits for cert. If it will be stable on that motor, > launch and enjoy! Ours is weighing in at 36.5 ounces. Built with medium CA for most of the rocket, the lugs are expoyied on and not painted (yet anyway). I really don't know how that extra 4.5 ounces came from. I have found that almost all kit makers underquote the dry weight of their rockets. I don't know why, but its almost always true. I think it's an "ideal" weight, but I have yet to build one that matched the specified weight. 36.5 oz = 1035g A/T G80T-4 = 105g Rocket + Motor = 1140g allowable payload = 360g or 12.7 oz You could send up a full can of coke if you wanted. (I know fl oz != oz....but it would be kinda cool to send up a can of coke anyway) -Aaron > > I don't see what the big problem is. The Aerotech website for the > > G-Force says the dry weight of the rocket is 32 oz. You can add 21 oz [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I really don't know how that extra 4.5 ounces came from. > Are you telling me: "at your launches, someone wants to launch a a AT > Baracuda ona AT G80-T, a rocket that weighs in at more than 1500g > loaded, (at least mine soes), the individual can only launch if the > individual is HPR cert level 1 or better"??? Say it isn't so Bob..... Correct. And they have to use an HPR pad and meet HPR safe distances and we need a waiver and not just notification. Ditto for a Mustang with a G33, or when they were available an F101 (except for the waiver parts on these light rockets). SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org S&T is becoming this decades Steve Weaver! I would question the Mustang with a G33. The Aerotech website lists the dry weight of a Mustang as 320g. glue/paint/sloppy build/etc make it 400g. A G33 is certified as 100N-sec of impluse with 72.2g of propellant and weighs 160g. A rocket weighing in at 560g, having a motor that is less than 160N-sec and less than 125g of propellant. No cert is required but a FAA notification would be (1.2lbs for this configuration) An HPR pad would not be required, neither would HPR safety distances. I could find the numbers for the F101, but as they are no longer certified, it doesn't really matter. All limitations are moot if the RSO/LCO raises those limitations. An RSO can tell you to launch that Quark from a HPR pad if they want and you'll launch it from there or it wont launch at all. -Aaron After re-reading this (type, read, THEN post, I know) the G33 exceeds the 62.5g limit for a single motor. My applogies. -Aaron > After re-reading this (type, read, THEN post, I know) the G33 exceeds > the 62.5g limit for a single motor. My applogies. > > -Aaron Yea, but a G80T does not exceed 62.5g, so why the need for HPR certification to launch the motor in a 1500g + rocket? All I can find indicates launch it as a HPR; nothing about being certified to fly HPR. Maybe the understood intent is that you would use an H or above HPR motor to launch. This whole subject is starting to get anal. All I know for sure; I launched my Loc Mini-Mag on A/T G804T before I was HPR certified and no one had an issue with it. And by the way, it was at a NAR launch right in good old Middletowm MD.. Fred >Yea, but a G80T does not exceed 62.5g, so why the need for HPR >certification to launch the motor in a 1500g + rocket? All I can find [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Fred > So, now we know... "Who flew the G???" <G> David Erbas-White > Yea, but a G80T does not exceed 62.5g, so why the need for HPR > certification to launch the motor in a 1500g + rocket? All I can find > indicates launch it as a HPR; nothing about being certified to fly HPR. Any rocket over 1500g is an HPR rocket. NFPA 1127 requires HPR certification to fly an HPR rocket. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org S&T is becoming this decades Steve Weaver! > > Yea, but a G80T does not exceed 62.5g, so why the need for HPR > > certification to launch the motor in a 1500g + rocket? All I can find [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > -- > Bob Kaplow Well Bob, I guess I'll concede your literal interpretation you presented, regardless of what has been my experience and that of a few others.. (:-) Found any new and interesting Fly-Cutters lately?? Fred, I not anal!!! > Well Bob, I guess I'll concede your literal interpretation you > presented, regardless of what has been my experience and that of a few > others.. (:-) Actually, this used to be a bigger issue. MR had its defined limits, and HPR had its defined start. All these wierd cases, like a 1501g rocket with a G80, a cluster of 6 D12s, or any rocket with an F101 or G33 were in a limbo zone that was neither MR nor HPR. One of the few times I managed to convince the NFPA folks that their regs were flawed was this case, and all the gray areas were defined as being HPR. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org S&T is becoming this decades Steve Weaver! > I would question the Mustang with a G33. The Aerotech website lists > the dry weight of a Mustang as 320g. glue/paint/sloppy build/etc make [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > safety distances. I could find the numbers for the F101, but as they > are no longer certified, it doesn't really matter. The G33 has, as you point out 72g propellant. Since that's over 62g, it's no longer a model rocket motor. That makes it HPR. Look at the data sheet on the NAR web page: it correctly identifies it as an HPR motor. The F101 is HPR cuz it's over 80N average thrust. Ditto for the G104 and G125. One more time for the Garrett Morris crowd: There are several limits for what is a model rocket: total weight, total propellant weight, propellant weight of any single motor, average thrust of any single motor, and total impulse. [what did I forget?] Exceed any one of those limits, and your rocket is now an HPR rocket, requiring certification and use of the HPR safety code instead of the MR safety code. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org S&T is becoming this decades Steve Weaver! [looks like this post never went out Wednesday...] > Hi Fred: > I took a look in NFPA 1127 and any rocket that masses over 1500g at [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > haven't figured out how many MicroMaxx motors you need to cluster to get > over the 125g limit to also make it a high power rocket... 8) 313 of the old ones or 250 of the new ones! The total impulse in either case will only be an F motor. 6 D12s or 4 E9s put you over the 125g limit as well. To summarize for those who might still be confused: exceed ANY of the many model rocket limits, and you have a high power rocket. And to fly a high power rocket requires user certification except for your cert flight attempt. The attempt requires the use of a high power motor, so you can't L1 cert with a cluster of D12s or E9s. There's got to be an H or I motor in there somewhere. There are and always have been some major inconsistencies between the MR and HPR safety codes. The example I like to use is the 1499g rocket flown with a cluster of 3 F50 motors. It's a model rocket, doesn't require certification, and the safe distance is 30'. Now add 2 grams of wadding to the rocket, and it's now HPR, and the safe distance jumps to 200', more than 6 times the original safe distance. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org S&T is becoming this decades Steve Weaver! >> In article <Pine.BSI.4.61.0602271140540.28198@malasada.lava.net>, Helen Rapozo >> > I am just wondering what things to look out for when flying an [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >especially a G80 Blue Thunder, require HPR certification ?? Maybe I >missed it, or were you talking about motor certification??? Quite right, rockets need no certification. They do need to be passed by the RSO, even if the flyer is alone and acting as his own RSO. AR need not require use of certified motors or flyers. However, LMR is a red tape sweet spot. In this case a rocketeer (ideally an NAR or TRA member) without HPR certification or a LEUP, can purchase MR G motors containing 62.5 g. of propellant or less, and fly as many as two clustered in a rocket with a launch weight of no more than 1500 g., with simple FAA notification. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.