Richard,
Could you use something like the Raven to activate relays that will do what
you want. I'm not sure how you can configure the Apogee and Main features
to stop at a certain altitude. Perhaps when the battery can no longer push
it up, apogee deploy can latch on a relay to run the motors in reverse. Or
just use the timing events to do the same.
Kurt
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 8:21 AM, Richard Dierking <applerocketry@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Oh, now I understand. I was thinking it would have it’s own launch pad
and system. Even if the launch “system" was pulling a string on an
insulator between two contacts. I was wondering how a rocket with a big
propeller on the aft end could even fit on a launch rod.
I’m going to start sourcing parts (motor, blades, battery) today on Amazon
and consider how to build a really light airframe too. But, I’m not a
‘sparky’ and have no idea how to make a timer that would shutoff after a
given time, then reverse polarity. I’ll look for micro pushbutton switch
for the nose shutoff on Digikey.
So, what do you think, 3 fins that would also support the motors with a
guard around the blades? Battery on the foreword end of the airframe and
charge in place. A 1/4” lug for a launch rod would fit between two of the
blades on the airframe. This would allow connection of a line to a mass on
a scale so we could determine maximum lift before flying ’the thing.”
Richard
On Feb 15, 2018, at 9:35 PM, John Coker <john@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
What I meant about the modification was to replace the switch with a
circuit that could be triggered from the launch control system. What I
imagine is that applying power from the launch control would trigger a
timer to close the circuit three times to simulate three button presses. 5s
later the rocket would take off on its own.
One problem would be how to replace the switch. The rocket is so light
that any umbilical would disturb the flight so I think that connection
would have to be wireless. The body of the rocket is foam so it would be
easy to hollow out an area for the receiver and a small battery.
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 5:37 PM, Kenneth Brown <ken@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
A G switch could be used or an accelerometer if you already have a
micro-controller doing other things.
Ken
On Feb 15, 2018, at 5:20 PM, Richard Dierking wrote:
Do you have an idea on how to provide timing (i.e. parts supplier)?shut down power when the nose touched a surface.
I think a kill switch could be placed on the tip of the nose that would
in. Again, I would prefer the safety of several motors with the blades
If you or others would like to do a small group project with this, I’m
enclosed in ducts. Timed power ascent, then polarity reversed on lower
power for descent. When the nose contacted the ground the power would shut
off.
as normally run, mostly because of the way it's initiated. You press the
Richard Dierking
On Feb 11, 2018, at 1:46 PM, John Coker <john@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
I don't think this rocket is suitable for a club launch, at least not
power button 1, 2, or 3 times to set the height and then it counts down 5s
and launches. It would be possible to build electronics that did this
triggering, but you would have to modify the rocket to replace the power
switch which doesn't seem worth the trouble.
no trouble holding it, but you can feel it pushing strongly.
It does have a decent amount of force when the fan gets going. There's
dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
John
sonic-startup.mov
<sonic-instructions.jpg>
<sonic-switch.jpg>
On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 4:00 PM, Brian Home <
wrote:Those would be called “Sailplanes “
On Feb 9, 2018, at 2:47 PM, Richard Dierking <applerocketry@xxxxxxxxx>
my original subject. Although now I can be blamed for people creating RC
And, I don’t even mind adding another completely different topic to
rockets and either not having wind when I said there might be, or having
wind when I said there may not be wind. OMG
discussion about the “Down” part, why you picking on me?Hey, let’s change the subject to Wind Powered Rocket!
On Feb 9, 2018, at 1:22 PM, Rich Silva <richsilv@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hey, the conversation wandered away from the “Up” part to some
kind of thing can happen at the club might be out of our hands…
I was only speaking to the potential point that whether or not this
ago I had even tried to come up with a steerable recovery system that would
Has nothing to do with whether my mind is closed or not… A few years
home back a beacon (safely away from the flight line)
sts.org] On Behalf Of Richard Dierking
From: roc-chat-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:roc-chat-bounce@freeli
another look at the subject title. I’m not an experienced RC pilot, but RCSent: Friday, February 09, 2018 9:27 AM
To: roc-chat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [roc-chat] Re: Electric Powered Rocket
You might want to go back a bit in the messages. And, even take
stands for Radio Controlled, and I’m assuming that means Radio Controlled
flight operated by someone on the ground. If this is true, than there’s an
existing law about amateur RC aircraft. So, no amateur RC rockets, with
the exception of rocket motor boosted gliders.
down parts of the flight). Might be good just to get ahead of a potential
Again, I suggest the Board consider electric powered rockets (up and
situation at a launch. And, how about rockets that could parachute back to
a closer recovery area? And, how about rockets with automated stability?
Soon, even amateur rockets will not need a launch pad, or even fins. Maybe
just have a ‘rule’ that new technologies must be submitted for review
before the launch.
and actually encourage the development of new things. I recall posting the
In general, I think it’s good to keep an open mind about new things,
subject 'Radar or Something Like It’ and getting the email equivalent of a
kick in the butt. But, look at what is happening at launches now, aren’t
people using apps for monitoring commercial air traffic?
ride time and perhaps except new things as they come along?
So, to be a participant in the development of the future, or just
wrote:
Richard Dierking
On Feb 9, 2018, at 8:13 AM, Rich Silva <richsilv@xxxxxxxxxxx>
to chime in on this…
I’ve been waiting for one of the more seasoned and active members
recovery… Doesn’t that smack of the (I forget both the official and theSo I’ll pose it as a question instead of a statement…
Isnt it the ATF that would have the heartburn about any kind of R/C
conventional term for it) “we cant actively guide our hobby rockets” rules?
sts.org] On Behalf Of Eric Holmberg (Redacted sender "enholmberg" for(A rule that the Boosted R/C Gliders play in a Gray area of…)
From: roc-chat-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:roc-chat-bounce@freeli
DMARC)
BLM has given the club a box to fly in on launch day, so I would think someSent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 3:35 PM
To: roc-chat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [roc-chat] Re: Electric Powered Rocket
R/C recovery seems to be a bad subject with the club. The FAA and
thing that helps our recovery stay in that box would be better than ending
up who knows where.
wrote:
Thanks, Eric
On Feb 8, 2018, at 12:34 PM, Paul Pittenger <ppittenger@gmailcom>
instead of a parachute have a rotor setup, maybe like an estes Helicat nose
I like the powered recovery idea, normal rocket up but then
cone but tethered to rest of rocket, powered and with a flight computer, so
that it could spin up to really reduce the descent rate as it neared the
ground, That would be interesting even without the additional complexity of
steering back to the launch site, which seems like it would require
multiple rotors & motors and a much more complicated GPS flight computer.
One thing this would prevent is dragging across the dry lake bed... once it
landed and motor turned off there would be nothing to catch the wind and
drag the rocket around killing your paint job.
again this year.
ROCtober was so great ! Hoping to get down there for some launch
applerocketry@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Paul
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 10:23 AM, Richard Dierking <
waiting to be unleashed outside.” And, also says “Recommended for outdoorThank you Mike!
After reading the description, I can’t stop laughing. “Just
use.” OMG, really! Wow, on those W days, we could just hold the launch
inside. :-)
can be launched like 50 times on a charge. So….
Also, it has three modes of altitude with the highest 200’. But,
RC. Interesting.
Looks like the Board does have something to consider. It’s not
wrote:
On Feb 8, 2018, at 8:52 AM, Mike Ostby <mikeostby@xxxxxxxxx>
-Motorized-Rocket/829455820?wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSelle
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Air-Hogs-Sonic-Rocket-High-flying
rId=0&wl13=2206&adid=22222222228128752915&wl0=&wl1=
s&wl2=m&wl3=235177691905&wl4=pla-387284505961&wl5=9031594&
wl6=&wl7=&wl8=&wl9=pla&wl10=8175035&wl11=local&wl12=
829455820&wl13=2206&veh=sem
applerocketry@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 5, 2018 2:58 PM, "Richard Dierking" <
illegal behavior. Also, people should note that ROC has specific rulesThank you David. Yeah, again, I don’t wish to encourage any
about RC aircraft at launches.
air taxi’s. That’s going to be interesting, because what would the ceiling
So, I’ve been reading about companies such as Uber planning for
be if there was a passenger but no pilot? This is a cool subject, and
creates many questions.
lately; even some wild ones. Particularly for high alt flights (<50K’). I
I’m just considering different types of recovery systems
was reasoning that if something could propel a rocket up, then it should be
able to slow it for landing. Again, just tossing it around.
high alt) with the shock cord attached to the aft end of the rocket. At
How about a Mylar balloon that would inflate at apogee (again,
high alt the balloon would be fully inflated providing the most surface
area for drag. Then the balloon would deflate on the descent so the
velocity would be steady. But, might be better to have something that
would have high velocity descent and slow down close to main deployment.
I’m kind of working on something like that now.
wrote:
On Feb 5, 2018, at 12:49 PM, David Smith <davew6dps@xxxxxxxxx>
as any other powered free-flight aircraft.
What you are describing would be subject FAA regulations, just
aircraft club, rather than try to imagine a grey area that actually does
You should look into AMA membership and find a local model
not exist.
NAR rules. A free-flight aircraft launched at a NAR/TRA would simply be in
Rocket launched gliders conflate things, but are addressed by
the wrong place.
That would be an interesting process to discuss.
The interesting question is powered recovery for a rocket.
applerocketry@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dave Smith
NAR 78668/TRA 15803 L2
Amateur Extra, W6DPS
On Feb 5, 2018 6:47 AM, "Richard Dierking" <
encourage anyone to do something illegal), the higher-end commercialJust speaking of capability (because I don’t wish to
quadcopters have ceilings that can be set up to 10,000m. I can’t find
anything specifically stating what the ceiling is. Seems like this
specification is avoided.
because that would probably make it a safer flight. Keep in mind that the
But, what I suggested was not RC. Which is kind of funny,
400’ maximum for RC is to provide the 100’ buffer to the lower limit of
500’ for manned aircraft, and ROC’s waiver for unmanned rockets goes higher
than 400’. So, what’s better, going over 400’ and being in control or not
being in control? Yeah, always better to be out of control. LOL
interesting and I’ve been doing some research on the subject. But, it’s
Anyway, the whole VTOL electric aircraft topic is really
developing quickly with new entries all the time. I would like to go OT if
others were interested because I have more questions every time I read
about some new venture into this market. I have identified 3 major
obstacles to the use of this technology btw.
Richard
--
ROC-Chat mailing list
roc-chat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
//www.freelists.org/list/roc-chat
