[AR] Re: [UK OFFICIAL] Re: Re[2]: Re: ORS-4 ("Super Strypi") Hawaii launc...

  • From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <acesaroni@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 16:43:03 -0500

“(as Anthony mentioned)”.



That was jest.



Anthony J. Cesaroni

President/CEO

Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace

<http://www.cesaronitech.com/> http://www.cesaronitech.com/

(941) 360-3100 x101 Sarasota

(905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto



From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of André Geldenhuis
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 4:36 PM
To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [AR] Re: [UK OFFICIAL] Re: Re[2]: Re: ORS-4 ("Super Strypi") Hawaii
launc...



Rather than them not building the rocket sturdy enough, which would be
surprising, it could have been as simple as the motor under performing. The
first stage was passively guided, so if the thrust was lower than expected, the
gravity turn could have been too steep (as Anthony mentioned). A higher max Q
could definitely rip panels off.

Andre



On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Redacted sender JMKrell for DMARC
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:

Maybe they should have considered the vehicle structure more than a little HCl
in the environment. The vehicle started breaking up about 33 seconds into the
flight. At least 6 potential objects from the vehicle are visible from the on
board camera, one being very close to the camera. Most appear in only one
frame. It would explain the roll-pitch coupling as skin and other components
were stripped from the vehicle and it became unbalanced.



Greg Zsidisin you got some good eyes to spot even one of those objects in real
time.



Here is the URL on YouTube <https://youtu.be/hl8ggmriieU>
https://youtu.be/hl8ggmriieU



Krell



In a message dated 11/5/2015 3:31:42 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
james.padfield@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:james.padfield@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

Cost, environmental issues (no perchlorate, no HCl products), perhaps it is
easier to get hold of. There are reasons you may want to use it...



On 5 November 2015 at 12:28, Monroe L. King Jr. <monroe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:monroe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:

Yeah it is AN and yeah I'm not a fan. Why did they choose AN?

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [AR] Re: [UK OFFICIAL] Re: Re[2]: Re: ORS-4 ("Super Strypi")
Hawaii launc...
From: BrianK ABQ <cielobenazul@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:cielobenazul@xxxxxxxxx> >
Date: Wed, November 04, 2015 11:19 pm
To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>


A question on the propellant. I only found one article that included
any details and it mentioned an "ammonium nitrate blend". Is that
correct? I'm a solid fuel guy, amatuer but hard at it. I've found by
both research and experience that AN composite propellant is quite
inferior to it's ammonium perchlorate cousin. Was the article wrong?
Did someone figure out a way to soup up ANCP? Or is it a "green
thing?" as ANCP doesn't make HCl ?

Thanks,

Brian






Other related posts: