propellanttech

Very nice implementation.

I like the idea....and it will help the guy's without an AV bay.

I hope it is a hit.

James L

StuBarrett

I'm intrigued; how does it attach to RMS forward closures?

Stu

lawndart

here take that AT!!!

UncleVanya

I have a few questions/comments:

Arming/Disarming:
How do you arm this unit? Is there any way to disarm it from outside the rocket? If you cannot disarm from outside, can you disarm after removing the motor without dismantling the e-bay?

Attachment
How exactly does it attach to an Aerotech closure. I looked at the pictures but it isn't clear - is this a simple friction fit? If so, could a high drag design potentially detach the unit before it fired?

Higher G Version?
The current version is limited to 30G which rules out many Warp-9 / Small rocket combo's. It would seem simple for them to market another board to go into this hardware. Does anyone know if this has been tested or discussed during beta / alpha testing of the product?

Reuse/Repurpose?
Given the way the altimeter appears to be mounted (wrapped in static-free foam) I suspect that some people may want to try placing other devices in the basic tube. Anyone have ideas about what they might be able to do with it? I was thinking about a timer in a second stage. Place the timer in the shell on top of the 2nd stage motor and run the igniter wire down into the motor. The second stage would need an altimeter mounted elsewhere to fire the ejection charge of course - but this makes placement of a timer pretty simple.

All in all I think none of the questions are show stoppers and I will probably buy one. The sealed bay is worth the price alone in my opinion.

denverdoc

Stu,
Me two--for plugged closures probably just drop a screw thru the e-bay into the eye bolt hole--for those w/o?? Also is the 15,000' limit just do to math/storage issues--and you don't get a reading or does the device not work. The gee threshold seems absolute: do not exceed under any circumstances.

UncleVanya

I didn't see that called out on the web site. This seems important. How did you determine this limit?

newtons3rd

Really interesting picture of the loaded ejection canister. Especially the use of the little foam plug to maintain powder contact with the element. How do you guys figure these things out. A truly innovative idea.....

UncleVanya

I beta tested your ejection cannisters and love them. You should be flattered that this basic idea is so good that others are copying it. Much like the IBM PC - if you use off the shelf components it's easy to copy your designs.

Of course your cannisters are equipped with an e-match alternative, come in two sizes, and are ready to fire without additional work. Nothing prevents a buyer of this from discovering your cannisters and buying those to use with this.

denverdoc

Says so on the website under the specifications. Probably not huge issue but there are many 54mm motors that can take a rocket higher--course, you prolly want to do the two step with those.

newtons3rd

Total tongue-in-cheek reply. Never considered it a "secret" Not sure if the output will fire one of our Hotwire cans, need to ask them as they had several samples and hopefully have tested with our product. Wish them good luck with the new product line.

H_rocket

AS I wrote elsewhere, my initial reaction was to reach for my wallet. Then reality sunk in... You can't use it with a Warp9 reload.

Bummer

I originally bought the EFC1 for the same purpose - so I could retro some of my smaller 38mm birds to fly the G339 and H669 without the effort of building out a complete DD scenario. I really want to fly my MR1 on a G339 so it will fly like the artillery shell it is styled after.

Phooey

denverdoc

For the "longer" burning W9's what about a timer. The Perfectflites need .4 sec of above threshold gee's, but otherwise they might work? Very small, and maybe one could fashion something very similar with a short 38 motor case with forward closures on both ends. Or even a expended 38mm SU motor case. There you could glue in the aft bulkhead....Just some notions...

H_rocket

My hope was for the G339 and H669 with burn times of .4 and .3 seconds respectively. So far I have a 50% success rate with the EFC-1. I did ask Peter at Perfectflite about it and he told be that the margins on the burn time would likely result in a failure to arm the timer. I proved him wrong once with my Small Endeavor, He got even on the next flight.

ddmobley

"Thank you all for your comments and questions about the Slim-Shot. I will try my best to provide requested answers

1. I hope it is a hit too!

2. The Slim-Shot canister is attached to an Aerotech forward closure via included stainless-steel screws of various lengths. You take one of the correct length screws with a washer, thread it through the flash-hole of the forward closure from the inside out. Now take the Slim-Shot canister and thread it onto the exposed screw (the canister has a threaded insert so no nut is required). We even provide an Allen wrench to tighten the screw. On the base of the canister are two milled "steps" that fit into the charge wells of either 38mm or 54mm Aerotech which effectively locks the unit into place preventing side to side movement

3. We have talked about a higher "g" version which will cost more money (i.e.., the consumer will pay more). After reading complaints time and again about the expense of rocketry products, we tried to provide a product that is high quality with attractive price points. If this product does well, we will revisit the prospect of a higher performance unit later, but this unit will always be available.

4. The Slim-Shot is ONLY ARMED upon launch via "g" forces over a certain threshold for an appropriate amount of time. YOU TURN ON the Slim-Shot by mounting the battery and observing the diagnostic read-outs, BUT THAT DOES NOT ARM IT, ONLY UPON LAUNCH DOES THE SLIM-SHOT ARM.

5. THIS PRODUCT IS NOT A JAB AT AEROTECH, EACH UNIT DOES DIFFERENT THINGS FOR DIFFERENT PURPOSES. THIS IS NOT AN "AT vs GLR" PRODUCT, WE NEED THEM AS MUCH AS ALL MANUFACTURERS NEED CUSTOMERS. I THANK MY LUCKY STARS DAILY COMPANIES LIKE AEROTECH EXIST.

6. PLEASE NOTICE THE PRICE, $99, this unit is made for the largest group of customers who want something convenient with attractive price points. These folks are our "market" this product is designed for. If this product does well we will re-visit issues about higher altitudes and "g" forces in a different version THAT WILL END UP AT HIGHER PRICE POINTS

7. Finally, that is a NEWTON'S 3RD ROCKETRY PRODUCT we have attached to the Slim-Shot and I personally apologize no recognition was given. IN NO WAY ARE WE COPYING IT OR COMING OUT WITH ANYTHING LIKE IT, THAT IS FOR OTHERS TO DO. Newton's have provided GLR (thank you) with their products to test with and I included it in the photograph. WE HIGHLY RECOMMEND IT OR ANY OTHER DEVICE BE GROUND TESTED FIRST TO CONFIRM ADAPTABILITY WITH THE SLIM-SHOT.


I thank you for your time and questions. If you have any further thoughts, I can be reached at the following email or phone number.

Best regards,

Kent/GLR
(I only wash bottles)
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
620-727-0045

Rocket Flier

Maybe they copied the idea from Pratt? He's used foam stoppers in those since early 2002.

I've always assumed the stopper came with the surplus medical viles he purchased.

UncleVanya

Kent will be getting an order from me soon. I appreciate the time it took to develop this and the effort expended to answer our questions. I will be looking forward to a higher G option - particularly if this is offered as an add on product to the existing customers.

Glad to hear that this works with the hotwire cannisters - I really like them. Don't always use them but they are nice to have in the range box.

To clarify something that was not clear to me before - this only will anchor onto Aerotech unplugged closures not plugged one's based on the description of how this attaches. That's the info I needed. Dang - now I gotta buy another 54mm closure...

StuBarrett

Kent seems to be guilty of getting carried along with the current political circus with his fuzzy talk ('certain threshold', 'appropriate amount').

More data, less innuendo.

Stu (just ordered one!)

UncleVanya

Dang you beat me to it. I just placed my order!

ddmobley

" I am not stating the Newton's product will work with the Slim-Shot, it has not been tested". Please ground test anything first.

Kent/GLR

ddmobley

"Dear Mr. Stu,

I apologize for as you say "fuzzy talk". I'm trying to cover my fuzzy rear.

Kent/GLR

H_rocket

Curiosity bump

Why do the messages from GLR get reposted by Darrell? It would be nice to engage them 1:1

/curiosity bump

ddmobley

It's a buffer. Kent doesn't want to get drug into the common petty exchanges that many forum posts (d)evolve to. Can't say's as I blame him.

denverdoc

So what's the deal with the 15,000' limit--based on what? BP issues? Just curious.

deandome

Seems to me that this is a single-deploy @ apogee device.

Why don't you try a single-deploy @ apogee launch to 15,000+ and let us know how it goes. If you launch this weekend, you should be getting back to us by mid-April with the results

denverdoc

Actually if you'll read the entire thread, you'll see that when I first posted the question, I noted in most cases one would want to do a dual deploy recovery in any event.

But having said that, I know of several folks who have recovered apo only birds from this altitude or a bit below, using tracking beacons.

I was simply curious as to why the limit. Doesn't mean I endorse it as the most efficient means of getting a rocket back from such heights.

heada

Combine this with a Chute-Tamer and you now have dual deployment.

-Aaron

denverdoc

Excellent idea!!!

Steve_Shannon

If I had to choose which event to control redundantly, the apogee event would be it. I like this device for that reason.

Sailorbill

Gene_Nowaczyk did single deploy to 93,284ft. and recovered in about 16 min. at a distance of 3.8 Mi. from the pad.

UncleVanya

The landing speed was a bit over 20'/second also...

denverdoc

I saw it go up, and up, and up some more--never saw it come down, or in what condition it was in after reuniting with terra firma. Anyone know?

UncleVanya

http://www.aeroconsystems....Balls2006/balls2006.html (Same link as posted before)

Steve_Shannon

The web pix at the link that Bill Richardson posted seem to show that it was successful. Some scorching on some parts. Core sampled just a bit at the aft end.

UncleVanya

That's the same link I reposted - didn't click his so didn't realize that it resolved to Aerocon's site. The text in the page details what happened and specifically states the rocket was ready to go except for 150lbs of propellant after it landed. It landed at very high speeds - 10 times what is normal - but apparently was fine.

Lawndartman

I have one of the beta ones, and the unit has had 15-20 flights on it. In all manor of rockets and loads. Sometimes as a ride along, some times as the main. It appered to always work. I learned to use it in several ways, and found it quite handy, and easy to use. If I was putting it atop an AeroTech motor, I just went out to the pad and armed the unit and slid in the motor and away it went. I fired mine always on M-tec's. Never had an issue. The last flight was a J825R (very nice motor) in my Talon 3 at NCR about 5 weeks ago. Fired perfectly at the top. It's not fancy, it just works, I like mine plenty and, they are not getting it back (GLR). And BTW, anyone who knows Kent, knows Darrell has his back. Sometimes it is a good idea to have someone between Kent's keyboard and the Forum...

Lawndartman

Correction, You turn the unit on, it will arm itself under thrust!

denverdoc

Well in theory you can say this about a lot of devices--and I believe it to be true, but in practice every one seems cautious around gee sensors. My own experience with premature detonation--baro fed devices.

UncleVanya

Darn - I was hoping you were going to say J-Tek's. Anyone out there used this with QuickBursts stuff, N3's stuff, or with J-Tek's? I don't have any M-Tek's... yet. I'm not keen on the lead - I know that sounds silly but it is true.

ddmobley

I have saved Kent certain embarassment on occasion. I make a great buffer.

Adrian A

Hmm.. Looks nice and simple. It would nicely compliment a Parrot altimeter that's programmed for low-altitude deployment.

denverdoc