Taking David's post as gospel; to launch the entire front row of Estes Alphas on C6-7s would require the front row to be 3000 feet from the flightline. On Apr 20, 2012 6:14 PM, "Wedge Oldham" <wedgeoldham@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Not to argue needlessly but; David stated 1.5 times. Allen you state 0.5 > > But both state EXPECTED ALTITUDE. Assuming Allen is correct; an expected > altitude of 10000 feet would require 5000 feet of cable. Currently the > best ROC has is 800 feet. > > I don't see how ROCs existing layout already takes this into account. > > Wedge > On Apr 20, 2012 4:05 PM, "Allen Farrington" <allen.farrington@xxxxxx> > wrote: > >> Nope. The change is to treat mass launches of that size as if they are >> complex rockets on terms of standoff. This does not alter the range sizes >> (different table) which is where the 1/2 the maximum altitude rule comes >> in. >> >> Since ROC's range layout already accounts for complex rockets, this >> doesn't really affect us. >> >> During our stand down period, the ROC board is reviewing our range layout >> and procedures to continue our safety focus. >> >> Allen >> Terseness and mis-spelling courtesy of my iPhone >> >> On Apr 20, 2012, at 3:07 PM, Wedge Oldham <wedgeoldham@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> So Goblins on Ks with an expected altitude of 10k need to be setup 15000 >> feet from the flightline?!?!? >> On Apr 20, 2012 2:53 PM, "David Erbas-White" <derbas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> >>> Don't know if folks have seen it yet, but as of this summer the new >>> guidelines for mass launches (anything more than 10 rockets) simultaneously >>> means the stand-off distance is 1.5 times expected maximum altitude (NAR >>> rules, but drawn from NFPA, so I would expect TRA to follow suit if they >>> haven't done so already). >>> >>> Guess the 'K' Goblin drag races will be but a memory, now... >>> >>> David Erbas-White >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ROC-Chat mailing list >>> roc-chat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> //www.freelists.org/list/**roc-chat<//www.freelists.org/list/roc-chat> >>> >>>