Rocketry Planet

CULPEPER, Virginia USA — Students and individuals around the country are testing altimeters and hashing out designs in anticipation of competing in the first semi-annual Rocket Battle Competition in November 2008. Plans are to hold a competition each spring and fall.

Open to anyone at any age, and brought to you by The Federation of Galaxy Explorers, Tripoli Central Virginia #25, and Tripoli Rocketry Association, participants will design, hand-build and fly high performance mid-power and high-power rockets to meet specified flight criteria.

The semi-annual contest is aimed at increasing interest in math and science and promoting aerospace careers among young people, and will involve teams of students from all over the country (for the inaugural November 2008 contest, any individual who wishes to compete may enter). The event will be held in Culpeper, Virginia at the venerable Battlepark rocket range.

This fall's challenge is to build and fly a model rocket that reaches maximum altitude on "G" through "I" class Tripoli or NAR certified motors. Winners will earn bragging rights and cash prizes.

Teams and individuals can register for the contest through August 2008.

For entry forms and more information, please visit the web site at http://www.rocketbattle.org.

Reader comments:

#1 Re: First Battle of the Rockets slated for November 2008

This seemed exciting until I started reading it in detail. Then I noticed a few things in the rules that bothered me.

• Rail buttons are required. For altitude I would prefer a tower. A tower would offer all of the benefits of rails and then some. But this is not permitted. I wonder if a pop rail button can be designed and if it would be allowed.
  
  
• Commercial motor retention is required. Friction fitting works. It's light and perfect for high altitude - but the desire to increase safety and disallow friction fitting seems rational. The irrational part is not allowing the use of improvised motor retention. Kaplow clips, medicine bottles, coat hanger wire, etc all make for fantastic lightweight and cheap motor retention. (For those who are unaware, Giant Leap sells a cheap but effective "Motorholder" which costs < 10.00 per rocket. The Giant Leap offering isn't very different from any homemade kaplow clip based unit but does offer the benefit of being "commercial" and having known good strong clips.
  
  
• External Switch for dual deployment is required. The document specifies that Dual deployment devices must be disarmed and only armed on the pad - with an external switch (no twist and tuck!). However it does not say anything about single deployment devices. The current restrictions would not prohibit using GLR's SlimShot or Aerotech's EFC even if combined with another device for main deployment. This is probably just an oversite and I suspect the intent was to limit electronic deployment to devices with external switches - which may mean no SlimShot and no EFC.
  
  
• Recovery aids? What does this mean? Do I want to know?
  
  
• Rocket Damage is poorly defined. Damaged = Disqualified. Damaged is not consistently defined in the doc. Paint scratch shouldn't disqualify but the doc is not explicit. Should be worded more like the NAR/TRA cert requirements. Minor damage that does not prevent reflight = no disqualification.
  
  
• You are required to have a different rocket for each event. Odd because two of the events have the same size (54mm) required. Seems weird that you can't reuse the G bird with the H motor... Maybe the G bird should have been 38mm to prevent this.
  

UncleVanya on 06-27-2008 03:54 PM

#2 Re: First Battle of the Rockets slated for November 2008

Agreed, so are there only one "size and style" of small rail buttons?

Towers eliminated.

There seems to be no motor diameter restriction given the "fat airframe" rule.

"16. Any part of the rocket or motor that free falls will result in a disqualification."

This seems to preclude pop lugs using the mandated rail guides.

What is the physically lightest and smallest OD motor retainer system? Aeropack?

ONLY Perfectflite A15K Rev 2 recording altimeter allowed. Does it dual deploy too? No.

What is the absolute lowest thrust motor in each power category at or near full allowable power?

Just Jerry

Just Jerry on 06-27-2008 04:08 PM

#3 Re: First Battle of the Rockets slated for November 2008

yea I'm a little puzzles to as to why different rockets need to be flown. IMHO It should be at the teams discretion to do double duty or not. More interesting perhaps is that the rocket be the same--or an identical replacement--to keep the penalty down if you fail one one of the legs.

Or just have three "open" events without these Nascar intake restricters. Safety? Waiver? Easy to sit here and find fault--I'm glad to see the Battleplan and hope participation is good.

But if stimulating science/engr interests are the primary motives, altitude with all these additional rules to level the playing field and make it completely safe, seem...well like a govt sponsored event.

Just an idle suggestion, but have at least one mission really challengng--may I suggest an "I" powered dual egg loft Boost glider--no R/C. One egg returns with capsule, onn egg has to glide home.

Let the youngins stetch their noodles some.

denverdoc on 06-27-2008 04:27 PM

#4 Re: First Battle of the Rockets slated for November 2008

Many of these rules seem to really stifle the creative process.

Dont we want people to think outside of the box? I think we can rely on the time tested RSO filter to keep things safe.

New Ocean on 06-27-2008 04:28 PM

#5 Re: First Battle of the Rockets slated for November 2008

Succintly put, thank you. About 80 percent of the innovation around altitude events has been with GSE--towers, pistons, etc. Having a fixed af diameter does invite experimenting with af design--should see some interesting dirigible shaped rockets is my guess. At least off the top of my head thats how I'd approach it. Short and very airfoiled. Even an I is not going to take a 75mm rocket too far into transonic to call for much deviation from this mold.

denverdoc on 06-27-2008 04:42 PM

#6 Re: First Battle of the Rockets slated for November 2008

Quote:

Succintly put, thank you. About 80 percent of the innovation around altitude events has been with GSE--towers, pistons, etc. Having a fixed af diameter does invite experimenting with af design--should see some interesting dirigible shaped rockets is my guess. At least off the top of my head thats how I'd approach it. Short and very airfoiled. Even an I is not going to take a 75mm rocket too far into transonic to call for much deviation from this mold.

That had not occurred to me. I assumed 54mm diameter was implying minimum (not max) diameter for the entire length of the airframe other than the nose. I see your point. No where did they specify that this was min or max diameter. Theoretically a 76mm - 29mm transition could be placed right after the nose and you would be in the bounds for the I motor competition.

I have some I69's...

Hummmm... yummy.


And some H50's....

Hummmmm...

UncleVanya on 06-27-2008 05:32 PM

#7 Re: First Battle of the Rockets slated for November 2008

Guys,

This is a work in progress but you make what I think are several good points. I've passed the thread on for review by the team, maybe we can make some positive mods to the rules. Me, I hate rules

Thanks,
Jerry O

vahpr on 06-27-2008 05:44 PM

#8 Re: First Battle of the Rockets slated for November 2008

Quote:

Guys,

This is a work in progress but you make what I think are several good points. I've passed the thread on for review by the team, maybe we can make some positive mods to the rules. Me, I hate rules

Thanks,
Jerry O

Jerry - forgive the tone of some of the concerns then. If this is still semi-fluid and can be updated before the deadline for registration then I think things can be fixed that are glaring. Some of the things we are complaining about may be by design and that's ok too.

Let us know what changes if anything.

UncleVanya on 06-27-2008 05:52 PM

#9 Re: First Battle of the Rockets slated for November 2008

Hello,

Thanks for the feedback. We originally designed this competition for high schools and a lot of the restrictions carried over. We'll take you concerns into consideration and make the changes. We can drop the launch pad and rail button requirements but will still keep the ban on lugs since we don't want to deal with rod whipping. One of the concerns we need to keep in mind is keeping spectators safe. Maybe not this year, but future events may have significant numbers of spectators.

Rocket diameter was specified to keep the maximum altitude at about 5000 feet. This was done after consulting with Tripoli board members to make the event available to more people who may have access to launch sites with low waivers.

Again, thanks for the feedback. We'll work out the changes within a week.

Ivan

ivang44 on 06-27-2008 05:55 PM

#10 Re: First Battle of the Rockets slated for November 2008

Rule 15 says if the rocket is not flyable without any need of repairs or mods then it is a DQ. I expanded the Disqualifications #4 as Rocket is damaged after flight and cannot be reflown without the need for repairs or modifications.

Does that help?

Ivan

ivang44 on 06-27-2008 06:03 PM

Comments 1-10 of 40 shown. Click here to read comments 11 through 40.

Registered users can add comments and discuss this article. To participate, please login or register.