DAllen

AeroTech does it once again. If they get a G version for the 29mm 24-120 case it is going to sell like crazy. I know I'd be first in line for those reloads.

-DAllen

R2K

They seem to have taken a hint from animal motors about the large number of colors, and also seem to be reacting to the BATF ruling by trying to get higher ISPs in sub 62 gram packages as well (or maybe that is just a side effect or me giving them too much credit) but I think strong Fs and Gs will represent a large market for them due to so many level 1 people (like myself living in NYC, not very wealthy) who are unable to deal with high power right now.

Any chance on getting 24mm loads in the new propellants? I am not expecting warp 9 any time soon, but red and green? I would love that.

I just did a post on my blog about some typical propellants, I think I need to expand it now to cover this new stuff. Glad I joined this forum, I feel like I am now back in the loop.

ddmobley

I've never really been a big fan of "personalized propellants" (read: colored variations). It always made sense to me to pick the propellant with the necessary oomph to get the job done. You don't really see NASA flying a green propellant on Columbia this month and a red propellant on Atlantis next.

It's the market that is demanding the colored propellants, and the market will ultimately determine what products we get to use. Unfortunately all of this tooling and packaging, developing, testing and certifying diverts money that would go to the R&D of other interesting products.

Personally I would rather see AeroTech bring back their hybrid motors than develop a variety of colored propellants. The hobby rocketry propulsion industry will only progress and move forward when it's developing new and interesting products, not stuck in some vanity iteration of "Pimp My Ride."

urbadave

Colored propellants exactly fit the flight profile for hobby rockets.

NASA flies rockets to support research. They don't do upscales, weird fins or fancy paint jobs either (unless it will make money to support more flights in support of research).

The purpose of 90+% of hobby rockets is visual impact and emotional response. We want to hear someone say 'wow' or 'oooh'. Colored-flame propellants serve that purpose very well (as does nice paint jobs and unusual airframe configurations).

urbanek

3FNC

I love the colored propellants myself, but just a mild caution. Depending upon the formulations used, and assuming the use of barium compounds to achieve the green color, you might not want to over handle or breath in the smoke from these motors (the same caution probabaly applies to all smoke flavors, really). If you read the MSDS for most of the barium compounds (barium nitrate especially) it's really nasty stuff.

That said, I saw the flight of Scott's V2 and the color was execellent, and these new green motors really do have a lot of juice packed into them. Hope they are a little cheaper then the AMW motors. Out here in sunny CA, those puppies are costly and only just recently legally available to fly.

-Steve

crontab

I whole-heartedly agree. Hobby rocketry motor manufacturers have limited budgets and even more limited R&D budgets. There is only so much money to go around.

But this is typical with America in general — everybody wants the most they can get in return for nothing. Me, me, me. A person with a LEUP doesn't seem to care what a person who can't get one cares about. The hobby NEEDS alternative propulsion systems to survive in post-9/11 days, but all the me, me, me generation wants is kaleidoscope colors in their rocket motor's flame. Personally, if these people want to see colors, they need to quit building rockets and start building fireworks. Rocketry has evolved away from science and research to gimmicks and one-upmanship. You only have to look at the size of rockets being built today for the larger group launches to see what's driving everyone's decisions: ego.

Steve_Shannon

Now that we know the downfall of western civilization is due to those who like to see a little color emanating from rocket motors we can all sleep peacefully, knowing another great mystery has been solved.

Making colored motors is a way for manufacturers to stimulate sales, otherwise they would not do it. It also stimulates interest in the hobby, which is a good thing. Like Dave Urbanek says, most people do this as entertainment, not hardcore research. Sales to people who are only interested in pure science is probably not enough to support one motor manufacturer, much less Aerotech, AMW, Loki, Roadrunner, Cesaroni, and the others. So, we probably should not look down our noses at people who like to see colored motors.

DumasBro2

Man, I must be in this for the wrong reasons. To me rocketry is just a hobby, I guess I have my priorities wrong.

crontab

You all are probably the same people who enjoy shoving an M motor up a frozen turkey's ass just to see if it will fly. I stand by my statement, the hobby has moved from people with a love for science to people who enjoy watching pyro displays. Anyone who would fly an outhouse, a wire cable spool, a traffic barrel, etc. are not in the hobby because they love to fly rockets. They love to fly anything that'll ride the flame. It's a pyro-thing, not a rocket thing.

Everyone thinks the government just started picking on hobby rocketry unnecessarily and that we've done nothing to deserve all the regulatory attention. That's a very naive position considering this penchant for behaving like a bunch of drunk frat boys on a Saturday night. Bigger and bigger "rockets" which crash with larger, more destructive, results doesn't go unnoticed. Add the natural uncertainty of aerdynamically unstable objects such as those mentioned above and the government is just waiting for someone to get hurt. Birdwatching is a hobby too, but you don't see those individuals attempting to see how well a red-headed wood pecker flies when duct-taped to a balsa glider. Hobby rocketry can still be considered a hobby if it's based on science and research — we don't need entertainment value for it to be considered a hobby. That's only become a growing concern over the last 10-15 years of the hobby. If you want entertainment, go to a strip club. If you want to protect our regulatory-fragile hobby, leave the pyro-madness and "entertainment" (i.e. "shock") value at home.

Hobby rocketry has had the "target on its back" increased exponentially because of people seeking "entertainment" value. It's not the people at the RRS or PRS or other research-driven organizations with blockhouses in the desert that have done this — it's the people who like to stand in corn fields next to a busy interstate highway and light the candle on six M motors surrounding an N while a crowd of frat boys stands at the minimal safe distance and cheers like a bunch of Delta Tau Chi alumni. You will never convince me otherwise. And I don't have a problem saying what most others don't want to hear, I'm not here to win any friends.

Amateur rocketry (anything that is not considered professional or commercial) has two faces. There are those who have a passion for aeronautical structures and passionately pursue the design and flight of rockets that mimic the works of their professional or commercial brethren. These are the people who respect the opportunity that they have at their fingertips and want to preserve this for future generations. Then there is this other faction that wants to create a spectacle for others to Oooo and Ahhh over, to be recognized for doing something solely for personal glory, fame and recognition. There is no goal in this group except the goal of "more is better."

It's like deer hunting in my neck of the woods: there are the conservators of nature who use a bow, don't take more than they can eat, observe as much as they hunt. Compared to the redneck hunter who runs in wide open with their four wheel drives plowing up huge washouts in the dirt roads, trailing 10-20 hunting dogs on his 4-wheeler, all to shoot an unarmed deer. Doesn't even have to be a buck to these hunters, they just want to get their picture in the local paper. Hardly conservators of nature. Like Redneck hunters raping the wild, redneck rocketeers are only there for their own personal gain and glory, to hell with the future and another generation's enjoyment. "Damn the cost, git 'er done."

It's interesting, though, that ever since I took a differning opinion to Steve that he has taken every opportunity since then to make jabs at me without actually coming right out and saying so. A real interesting position coming from someone who tries to be the calmer for everyone else. A little passive-agressive, are we?

Steve_Shannon

You took my response too personally. Nowhere in it did I attack you. I just honestly disagree with you about the importance of colored motors (and other things as well). I am not trying to be the "Anticrontab". I tried to keep my comments to the points of disagreement rather than personality. I did think the joke about the end of western civilization was kind of funny, but obviously you did not.

I should not need to defend myself for having an honest difference of opinion, but maybe if I tell you a little about myself you will realize that I am not much different than you. For the record I fly mostly 3FNC or 4FNC rockets, but I like to try different motors in them to see how they perform. I usually don't choose a motor based on flame color, but I enjoy seeing colored flames; I don't think that's a fatal flaw. I seldom fly anything as large as an M. They just are not as fun for me and they cost more than I can comfortably lay out often. Instead I fly F through K motors. I would like to become expert at staging, clustering, and composite construction.
I have never flown an outhouse, a turkey, or any other odd rockets, but I would like to try a bowling ball competition someday. That Mark Clark is a fun guy. All my rockets look like rockets, but I enjoy seeing and reading about how others solve the problems necessary to stabilize and fly odd rockets and recover them because I think I can learn from their experience.
My degrees are in Engineering Science, not psychology. I am not qualified to diagnose the problems of the world. Of course, I have my opinions about them, but this is a rocketry forum so I keep my opinions to myself (mostly - my self control is imperfect). I am not qualified to judge others.
My biggest enjoyment is getting together with other rocketeers to fly rockets, talk rockets, and learn about rocketry. That is why I hang out here.
I don't do fireworks, but I enjoy watching them once a year. I rarely hunt, but when I do I am on foot and I take the animal for food for my family only. I try very hard not to waste anything. The parts I don't like that are edible (the liver) I give to others. I leave gates as I find them, I pick up trash when I find it, and I try to live my life without rocking other's boats. I actively support NAR and TRA, and I am grateful for the good things they have done. I try to give to the legal fund, but I should probably give more.
So, that's me, with no apologies. Now, can we get back to rocketry?

ddmobley

Steve, I think Crontab makes a good point about public perception driving the regulatory environment as it concerns hobby rocketry. I am like you in many ways with what I build and fly, with the exception of the desire to fly a bowling ball.

In my opinion, bowling balls are better suited for bowling alleys. If you might recall, initial public perception of rocketry is "Wow! How do you get them back?" followed by a dissertation on parachutes and safe recovery. The exchange starts with excitement, is taken back with shock and concerns about the danger of rockets plowing in and then set back upright with the explanation that we use recovery systems. Even with such a simple exchange, some people are satisfied with the answer, and some walk away thinking it's a dangerous activity, and in some regards, given that recovery is still our biggest hurdle, they have every right to that opinion.

Add to that a 16 pound bowling ball. You will go through the same exchange explaining away the reasoning behind it and relative safety of the event, but you won't win as many converts to your way of thinking because of the inherit risk involved with the addition of a large weight descending from the sky. Any other factor, such as shape, profile, complexity, etc. that you add to the equation only increases the odds that you will successfully convince the general public and their watchdog governmental agencies that the activity is indeed safe. Argue long enough and the general public and the associated watchdog groups, who represent the majority in the United States, will deem that you are illogical and incorrect and need their protection from your own self for your own safety.

Should I be able to build a full scale, high power version of the Atlas used in The Astronaut Famer and be able to launch it in America? Yes, I should. I am supposed to live in a free country where I am allowed to do that. Should I do it? Probably not. If I do and succeed, I only have bragging rights to show for it, which would be satisfactory for a large number of hobby rocketry enthusiasts, at least until someone decides a full scale, high power version of a Saturn V is appropriate. If I do it and fail miserably, say in a large way with property damage, personal injury or loss of life, it would be injurious to the very hobby I claim to love and want to preserve.

In that regard, what is more important: the pursuit of the hobby in whatever manner one deems appropriate or the preservation of the hobby based on sound reasoning and consideration to things we can't control? One approach goes all out for the purpose of stroking the ego, the other sacrifices a little of the personal pursuit to ensure others are able to participate at some level in the future. It truly is something to consider.

With freedom comes great responsibility. If we act irresponsible, we may lose some of those freedoms. And today, those are getting stripped away much too readily to be purposely giving the government reasons they should take even more.

Steve_Shannon

Crontab definitely makes a valid point about public perception and we all have to keep that in mind as we make our choices in this sport/hobby. The problem is (and perhaps always will be) that if we avoid all those activities that might scare someone, we are left with precious little, because for every activity, you or I or Crontab can find someone who is anxious. That is why there are specific groups of rules for this type of activity, to ensure safety and to minimize the damage to public perception. AHPRA has adopted a pretty thorough set of bowling ball rules. TRA has adopted a Research Rocketry Safety Code. TRA and NAR have adopted High Power Safety Codes. All of these safety codes and internal rule sets serve that one purpose, to make the hobby safer. Making the hobby safer provides us with a mechanism by which we can logically manage public perception. However, your point, and that of Crontab, still remains, we need to be conscious of how we are perceived and act accordingly.

But really, the prizes that Mark Clark receives from the manufacturers for the bowling ball competitions are wonderful. I want some of those.

ddmobley

If I want them that bad, I'll buy them. That is a cheaper price to pay than the result of ONE accident with a bowling ball getting in the wrong regulator's hands. I, for one, will never be on the range when a bowling ball competition is taking place. I simply can not support something I don't believe in, and the previous paragraph did nothing to convince me otherwise.

Part of the responsibility we have is in being able to judge risk vs. reward.

Steve_Shannon

Good for you. Although we disagree, I respect your principles and I appreciate the fact that we can discuss it without feeling the need to insult each other or whole groups of people.

H_rocket

One might consider the possibility that there are those of us who actually like both aspects. I enjoy the study of how the rockets fly, I'm trying to understand researh motors, although certain considerations may limit how far I go into that, and yes, I will stand up and admire the fireworks of an M-Skid with the best of them.

Does there always have to be a right way...


BTW, as usual you can expect a Dumas Bro to nail it...

This is my hobby, if I go home happy at the end of the launch I don't much care if it was a full day of M powered Butterballs. It sure as hell beat a full day of e-mail at the office.

A

Fore Check

I find this to be elitist at best and fascist at worst.

To imply that there is no science, engineering, thought, or method involved in being able to launch a 16" rocket with 6 M's and and O cluster is just plain hooey.

"Hobby rocketry can still be considered a hobby if it's based on science and research — we don't need entertainment value for it to be considered a hobby. "

I don't know about you, but I partake in a "hobby" *for* the entertainment value. Otherwise, said "hobby" becomes plain old "work."

So let me get this straight. Unless I fly a rocket for the pure joy of gathering engineering flight data, therefore the sole purpose of building the rocket and selecting the motor is secondary to the data and therefore is purely engineered for that purpose, I'm a "Redneck hunter raping the wild ... for [my> own personal gain and glory?"

Wow. Perhaps you should be the one to reconsider your place in this "hobby" and go about your research activities under a different guise.

shockwaveriderz

folks:

we are just going back to our "pyro" roots with this color, smoke and sparky stuff.

This stuff used to be the sole province of pyrotechnic rocketry; it just turned out that it was very difficult if impossible to do with BP; it took composites to bring this technology to the masses.

I personally have no problem with colored flames, smokes etc. If fact these attributes might bring more people into the hobby if an when they see them in use.

As far as for all the Odd-Rocs; well that historically has also been a big part of model rocketry and now its just moved up to the HPR scale.


My only complaint is I wish all these colors and such were available to the low end of the composite market in DEFG size.

terry dean
nar 16158

crontab

Whoo boy, I've got a whole bunch of enlightenment to do here, so I better "Get 'er done!"


There are those out there who 1) enjoy sex, and 2) enjoy sex with little boys. It doesn't make "both aspects" correct, beneficial or useful, but advertising the second one can actually cause you some problems.


So, the self-centered message here is you'll do whatever makes you happy as long as it's better than a day at the office, no matter if that activity is beneficial for the preservation of your hobby for future generations, right? This is exactly the message I was trying to communciate. The Baby Boomers are so engrossed in self-gratification that the impact of their actions is of no consequence. Amazing!


Nothing of the sort was ever said. What was said was:

"it's the people who like to stand in corn fields next to a busy interstate highway and light the candle on six M motors surrounding an N while a crowd of frat boys stands at the minimal safe distance and cheers like a bunch of Delta Tau Chi alumni."

What I guess you didn't see was the "next to a busy interstate" and "a crowd of frat boys stands at the minimal safe distance" and acting like Animal House rejects. Look. A regulator doesn't really care if you want to get in the middle of a desert and become a moving target for inbound ballistic missiles. Usually when that takes place there are far less people around with much, much more room for the impact to take place without hurting anyone else. You move that same scenario along side an interstate highway and increase the number of spectators, and a regulator becomes more convinced someone is going to get hurt. It's just simple logic, so why is this so hard to grasp?

My point was why increase the odds that that logic is going to register to a regulator by flying ridiculous objects. Knobby motors start fires. It's just plain and simple. Therefore the odds of a sparky motor drawing unnecessary attention to the hobby is greater than a non-effects motor. If avoiding things that can be detrimental the hobby is too much to ask because we are too self-centered in our demands, then who's to blame? Washington? Get real!


Who is this "we" you talk about? Is this an admission?


Bringing more people into the hobby is not necessarily a good thing. Look what happened when AOL invaded the Internet.


Translation: "My only complaint is I want more, more, more." Definition: See Baby Boomer.

H_rocket

So, I guess your thesis is that unless we engage in sport rocketry the way you think we should, we are pedophiles who want to destroy rocketry? Personally I think your stance is rather myopic. It should be possible possible to mix the pure science with a little fun.

Don't take me wrong here, you have a position that is to one extreme and if it is the way you believe, cool. I just personally prefer the launches where there are families, spectators, and people to whom we can demonstrate more than a 3FNC necksnapper ripping off a pad. To be honest, most people who would not understand the effort that goes into a successful flight like that would find it kind of boring. Of course, I surmise you probably take the position of "So what? this is science, not the Gong Show." And that is a valid point of view. Some will share it, some wont.




It does beg the question though, which type of amateur/hobby rocket is going to get more official scrutiny. The show piece that is a crowd pleaser, or the 4" research rocket that breaks mach 2 on it's way to 100K. The only rocket that is not gonna register somewhere somehow is a Baby Bertha on a C6-7

I do puzzle at the whole direction you are espousing. It almost sounds like you believe the only way for rocketry as a hobby to survive is if it goes essentially underground.

Just out of curiosity, when was the last launch you saw that so blatantly violated the TRA/NAR safety rules as to even come close to scenarios you describe.

Yeah, I've been there when a sparky motor set fire to the freaking dirt at a launch. Kind of scary. However the folk I fly with simply say if the conditions are not right, sorry, no Skids.




Wow, now there is self centered, all mine, baby boomer logic.

And for the record, I kind of think the whole bowling ball lofting thing is kind of silly.

Steve_Shannon

For the record, it was I who showed an interest in someday competing in bowling ball lofting, not Crontab. I did not call anybody names when I did it though.

H_rocket

While I would really like to see AT bring back their hybrids. Mostly because the idea of being able to get ready at home where it is quiet and I can make sure things are done correctly really appeals to me.

On the other hand, how about a few ideas on where you think the propulsion industry could focus if not on the "Pimp my Rocket" Stuff.

To me Crontab seems to be saying that unless you are engaged in serious rocketry (and I'm not quite sure what fits that description) you are a danger to the hobby. Perhaps I am wrong, however that is this guy's impression.

I understand, to an extent that there are cases that might draw unnecessary attention, however the comment in response to Terry Dean wanting to see more at the low end of the power spectrum is rather selfish.

I too would like to see more on the low end. I live in CT where the closest field I can fly anything like a J or bigger and stand a good chance of getting it back is at least 2 hours away.

Oh, I can see that one coming...If I'm not willing to drive at leat two hours, then I should go back to my Legos.

Well, it is a moderately free country. Thankfully we have places like this where intelligent folks can disagree.




Steve -> If you think I was name calling, nothing could be further from the truth. I thought the bowling ball loft was strange when I first saw it on Rocket Challenge. Me? Zero interest. You? Do it safely and I say knock your socks off. Build a bowling ball lofter, learn something in the process, do it better next time, and have a ball (bad pun) while you do so.

Steve_Shannon

No, I didn't think you were name calling. I thought you confused my posts about bowling ball lofting with Crontab's posts and I was desperate to illustrate the difference between him and me.

Rocket Flier

Am I the only one to find it amusing that to some, gluing wood fins to a cardboard tube and using a store bought motor constitutes 'rocket science'?

Steve_Shannon

Probably not, but it is rocket science. It's all relative, right?

To a sixth grader who all of a sudden understands the relationship between CP and CG, the relationship between thrust and weight, and how math and science can describe what he or she is observing, flying a cardboard tube with glued on wood fins and a store bought motor is truly rocket science.

Rocket Flier

Guess I can add that to my resume: 10 years of aerospace engineering experiance,...

But do I put xacto under 'tools' along with RockSim?

Fore Check

I can't believe that I'm actually acknowledging this drivel by posting a response, but here goes. {deep breath...}





What part of "thought and/or method" do you not understand? Cite one project - ONE PROJECT!! Of a complex clustered high powered rocket with that kind of impulse that was lit like a "candle" on the shoulder of a "busy interstate" by a bunch of drunken frat boys?!?!? ONE!!!!!!!!!


That kind of launch requires launch support. That means a nationally sanctioned club. That means compliance with safety rules that are there not only for the protection of those not involved, but also for the preservation of those of us who are.

Your true colors show when you get down to referring to "knobby" motors. That's your real problem. Admit it.

It's people like YOU who are bringing regulation and adverse public perception to the hobby by actively pointing the finger in the spirit of censorship. Education and outreach, like that provided by the clubs and organizations who support and are devoted to this hobby is how to change that - not fascism.

Go back to your lab and run some experiments. In fact, why don't you find the modulus of elasticity of your wanker under a modulating load. Hell, you'll probably stay busy for hours just finding a test specimen. Imagine how much fun data collecting will be this time?

ddmobley

Al, I think the area of hybrid research is exactly the type of thing the propulsion industry should be focusing on. Alternative propulsion systems, even alternative propulsion types would be of more benefit to the hobby than expanding the current base of regulated propellants.

This could be hybrid propulsion, tribrid propulsion, nonhygroscopic ammonium nitrate composite propellants, affordable and simple to fuel liquid propulsion, etc. It seems all of the major motor manufacturers (and particularly the ones focused on effects) are betting the farm on winning the lawsuit, when it's still an uphill battle and one helluva longshot.

You have to understand that I talk to these manufacturers behind the scenes and they do not have unlimited operations budgets, spending their money where the current demand points them. Money spend developing display fireworks is money not spent plotting an intelligent course for survival for their companies. Them's just the facts, Al, as they tell me. Until the consumer decides there's something more important than pyrotechnic displays, alternative propulsion technology will not move forward at these companies. Something has to give.

H_rocket

Darrel,

A good point. However I have to ounter that too many of the manufacturers are focused (IMHO) on the big dawgs. Yes I fly 54mm when I can and really enjoy it. My personal favorite is the AMW green, because I like the way it performs, and the green flame is a bonus. Right on it's heels are the fast whites and new fas blacks. mostly because ny vision sucks and I wan to track the flight.

Going back to my original thesis, the manufacturers need to think beyond the LDRS type flights. Setting the lawsuit aside for the moment, there seems to be little interest in servicing the needs of flyers that don't have the fields to meet the 1500' limit required for an H motor.

This does a whole lot, again IMHO, to harm the long term health of the hobby. You get a good start in BP, then there is an extremely limited offering for folks who wnat to transition.

Still, I personally think things are not as dire as some might believe.

crontab

You need to learn to tell the difference between someone posturing an analogy and someone making an accusation. I won't even answer your question because anyone who can tell the difference can answer it themselves.


Don't misunderstand me, we aren't that far apart in what we enjoy. It doesn't have to be pure rocket science, the most efficient propellant, the lightest airframe, the cream of the crop as you suggest. It can be upscales and downscales and personal designs and this kit and that scratch-built. I don't have a problem with anything except the egotistical displays of pure testosterone.

A group of people get together and build a flying outhouse. For what? The project leader told me out of his own mouth it was all for show, just to generate attention. It was nothing more than pure exhibitionism. The project leader is a known ego-junkie whose only goal is to elevate his name and make a permanent mark on history. That is an unusal hobby.


Obviously the latter one isn't going to raise an eyebrow. The 4" research rocket probably isn't going to either, because it's going to be done in a very remote location in order to be awarded a 100K waiver by the FAA. That only leaves the testosterone show piece, that while a crowd pleaser it is still the one that is probably more prone to fail in a more crowded place, meaning the risk of a spectator getting hurt is higher.


Kind of sounds like what the RRS, PRS, ARS have been doing for DECADES doesn't it? Keeping it on the down-low, out of the press, away from prying governmental agencies. Traditional high power enthusaists though, we are all over the Internet, in magazines, newspapers, posting videos, etc. We are involved in high-profile (by hobby standards) lawsuits, writing congresscritters, raising funds. When was the last time you heard of the RRS getting into trouble with the local airport's ATC and the FAA over launching too close to the airport? Underground has worked for the last 45 years for the rest of the amateur rocketry community.