HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Please stop calling Kaplow about the Prang Film...
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:23:24 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Aug25.211705.29111@primerd.prime.com>, J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM (Jim Cook) writes:
> Perhaps you should call Bob Kaplow just <<one>> more time to suggest he
> contract out the copying business to Kyle Shugrue at Rocketmen Videos...

OK, here's what's happening (according to Judy Kaplow):

Bob has a Beta machine and no VHS.  But Bob Weirsbe has a VHS and is
willing to do the copying from Bob's deck, for some fee not yet determined
(whatever it is, it will probably be less than Kyle would charge, since
Kyle does this for a living).  My suggestion is that all of you who are
interested in a copy of the "Boosted Arcas Plus" tape send a SHORT e-mail
to Bob Weirsbe (hrbob@cbnewsb.cb.att.com) so that he will have an idea of 
how many tapes he may be looking at.  Then when he figures out how much it
will cost, he can get back to you with those details.

Maybe we ought to make this tape a NARTS product...!
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: smith@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Greg Smith)
Subject: Re: HPR motor hooks (was Re: Estes composites, etc...)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 20:20:06 GMT

> does anyone have any suggestions/recomendations for systems to provide 
> positive retention of the motor in the motor mount.  

My Aerotech Initiator kit definitely did come with a motor hook, 
essentially a scaled up version of the Estes kind.  (But REALLY scaled 
up -- it's about 3/8" wide and takes both hands to push it out of the 
way to insert the motor.  It also has about a 30 degree bend toward the 
center of the tube at the point where it overlaps the end of the motor 
tube -- the intention apparently being to make sure it presses HARD 
against the side of the motor.)

At our launch Sunday, Bob Kaplow was showing his blind-nut-plus-spring 
steel clip system similar to the one Neil described.  He has several 
different lengths of clips for different combinations of motors and 
rocket designs.  These appeared to be made out of some kind of spring 
steel, and hook over the very back end of the motor casing (no 
modifications to the motor are required).

Some of the other Chicago area people had systems where a plywood ring 
with a hole slightly smaller than the outside diameter of the motor was 
placed over the nozzle end of the motor and secured into the model by 
three screws and blind nuts.  This is similar to the above approach but 
doesn't require fabricating the metal hooks -- although it looks quite a 
bit draggier to me.

Greg Smith N9LHI
NAR 15881 SR
smith@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Astrocam 110 Film
Keywords: 400 speed 110 film still being produced?
Date: 2 Sep 92 19:23:57 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Sep2.165814.28661@ennews.eas.asu.edu>, elder@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (Greg Elder) writes:
> Is it may imagination, or did someone in an old post (about 3-5 months ago)
> mention that 400 speed 110 film was no longer being produced?  As a result,
> you would have to use 200 speed in the Astrocam.  The reason I ask is that
> I was in a local Wal-Mart store last evening, and they had lots of
> 400 speed 110 film.  Maybe they are getting rid of whatever they have
> left (or maybe I am just imagining what I thought I had read months
> ago).  If 400 speed is not going to be produced any longer, I'll
> go out and buy a few rolls for myself.  (I have an Astrocam 110 but have not
> built or flown it yet.)  Thanks.

It was probably me who posted this.  400 ASA film was first pulled in the
mid 80's, I believe; then came back in the late 80's.  Then I heard from
others in my club last year that it had been discontinued AGAIN.  So maybe 
it's coming back AGAIN.  Best thing to do:  look at the expiration date on
the film and compare it to the expiration date on the 200 film.  If it's
older, I'd suggest you stock up.  If not, it's apparently come back.
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
From: chuckh@hal.COM (Chuck Heron)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Tahoe/Carson City/Reno area Rocket suppliers?
Date: 2 Sep 92 19:10:11 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: runamok.hal.com

Are there any good Hobby shops/people who sell rocket supplies in the
Carson City/Tahoe/Reno area?
I'm mainly looking for a 38mm reloadable motor to help me on my way to
certification, although I'd like to check out any good rocket shops that
people can recommend.

If anyone can send me some specific addresses with recommendations
or post the list of rocket suppliers, it would help me out.

Thanks
-chuck
..still waiting for my Tripoli #
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: Jim Cook <J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM>
Subject: Re: HPR motor hooks (was Re: Estes composites, etc...)
Reply-To: <J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM>
Organization: Prime Computer, Inc.
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 17:55:40 GMT

In article <BtyI5y.C9H@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> jsivier@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Jonathon
Sivier ) writes:
>
>   On this subject, does anyone have any suggestions/recomendations for
systems
>to provide positive retention of the motor in the motor mount.  Something like
>the motor hooks used in 18 and 24mm motor mounts, only larger.  Are such
things
>available or do you have to roll your own.  Every time I tape a reloadable in
>one of my rockets I think "What if I didn't secure it well enough and it blows
>out instead of deploying the chute?".  If that happens then the rocket is
>destroyed (prang!) and the reloadable motor is lost and/or destroyed falling
>from a great height.  I'm trying to think of some clever system to ensure that
>this doesn't happen and thought that other folks have probably had these same
>problems and may have worked out solutions.

Some folks at NARAM 33 suggested drilling a small hole in the side of the
flange of the rear nozzle retaining ring to tie the casing to the model. 
Some might claim this to be "modification of rocket motors not approved by 
the mfg."  I had though I heard Aerotech was going to start doing this 
themselves, but I haven't seen anything yet.

Jim
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Scale rocket competition
Date: 1 Sep 92 23:44:26 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <BtwM40.5C5@news.larc.nasa.gov>, biedron@tab00.larc.nasa.gov (Robert Biedron) writes:

> hmm...sweeping shavings off the floor to make model rocket motors...?
> I've never heard that story 
> before - sounds a little far-fetched to me. Still, I suppose stranger things 
> have happened. 

Why do you say that?  Isn't that how Jerry... um... forget I mentioned it.
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Re: Ignition Systems
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 16:39:03 GMT

>In article <1992Aug27.172003.8211@med.umich.edu> Roger.Wilfong@umich.edu writes:
>>>Someone showed me a mid-sixties op amp. It was in a plastic case about an
>>>inch and a half square with four 1/16" diameter pins underneath.. 

>>The OP amps you are refering to were probably hybrid or potted descrete
>>component devices. ...they were often potted to provide a more uniforn 
>>temperature environment.  I remember working with some that looked like 
>>tubes (valves for you Brits) complete with 8-pin octal bases.

Were these transparent glass or opaque plastic or ceramic? They were 
solid state, right?






-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Scale rocket competition
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 17:08:50 GMT

Just curious.

How is scale rocketry competition run? In the Model Airplane 
world scale competitors have to have documentation (drawings,
pictures) so that the judges can judge how true to scale the
model is. In the old FAI Precision Scale the judges actually
carried around scale rulers and went over all the dimensions. 
These days there is "Precision Scale" where the judges get up
close to the airplane and "Stand Off Scale" where the judges
cannot get closer than 2 meters (I think) from the model.

That was for static judging. For the flying phase the judges 
will give points for realistic flight, including the demon-
stration of working features...bomb drops, flaps, retractable
undercarriage, smoke...

Is there static judging in Rocket Scale?

Hmmm.. I'm thinking that some of those composite motors that 
release lots of black smoke might be just the thing for scale
JATO bottles.... believe it or not this would fall under the 
AMA safety code. 



-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Scale rocket competition
Date: 27 Aug 92 22:39:56 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Aug27.203558.8791@med.umich.edu>, h198@hosp.med.umich.edu writes:
> In article <5955@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
> writes:
> >
> >They are officially rated by S&T as zero thrust engines.  However, I have
> >at least twice seen FX engines "POP!" out of their mounts when ignited.
> >The most recent time was last weekend, when it not only took itself out of
> >the model, but yanked the main engine igniter out on the way down.

> Did it really spit the FX motor?  I've seen the FX motor spit an ignitor that
> had been packed in with a ball of recovery wadding - sure that's not what
> happened and the ignitor coming out pulled the ignitor out of the main motor.

Spit the motor out with some authority, taking the ignitor of the main
motor down with it.  As I say, I've seen this happen at least twice.  I
can't remember if the second one was actually a cato or not, but it was
in a board Bill Stine flew at the Dallas NARAM Manufacturers' Demo.
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: AstroCams - Where?
Date: 3 Sep 92 00:41:40 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <Btz4Bs.C24@acsu.buffalo.edu>, ztsindi@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (The Independents - SUNY Buffalo) writes:
> Howdy All,
> 	I seem to remember someone saying that the AstroCam was no 
> longer being made. As I haven't checked recently I don't know. IF they
> are no longer being offered, why? From the number of posts here that
> kit would seem to be an immensly profitable seller. 

Obviously not.  That's usually the reason Estes discontinues things.

> 	On a related note - is there still (was there ever?) a kit
> that took 8mm or Super 8 movies from within a trusty modroc? Has this
> also disapeared? That would be a very interesting thing to view! 

Estes made a camera called the Cineroc from about 1967 to 1971, but
it's been gone for a LONG time.  That was the only KIT movie camera
ever produced.

> 	One more question for the experts...Whats up with G.Harry
> Stine? Is he still involved in the field? I remember my own 
> introduction to model rockets was through one of his Handbooks that
> I found in the high school library when I was sixteen. I see that he
> still has a column in 'Analog', is he still cranking out The Handbook
> or has that been handed off to someone else? I remember it was a 
> no-nonsense kind of thing which stressed saftey on every other page
> with sentences like, '...if you like to make things blow up join the
> Army and become a Demolitions Specialist'. Excellent advice actually.
> That book was what convinced my parents I wasn't going to kill myself
> or be arrested (they had this notion that a model rocket was some
> kind of fireworks).

Yes, he's still around and living in Phoenix.  He's involved with
Quest Aerospace (a somewhat new model rocket manufacturer) and he's
the NAR's representative to the National Fire Protection Association.
He was at this year's NARAM this August in Las Vegas, and he actually
flew a half dozen models.  There is a rumor of a new edition of HoMR
in the works.
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Estes Bail-out
Date: 4 Sep 92 18:11:08 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Sep4.131720.25637@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, sxr@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (scott.l.russell) writes:
> Has anyone purchased/flown this rocket?  My son wants to get this one
> so he can use it with his "GI-JOE" men. Will those figures fit? I assume that
> all it does is push the men out with the wadding and they float down
> with their own parachute?

I've seen it flown, twice.  It flies OK, and it's made to fit GI Joe
action figures.  At the nationals, Mary Roberts (Estes) had one painted
up to resemble Bill Stine (Quest) and flew him.
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Estes Bail-out
Date: 4 Sep 92 18:19:06 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <15508@ksr.com>, clj@ksr.com (Chris Jones) writes:
> Once the 'chute failed to deploy (melted,
> actually, due to a bad job on putting in the wadding) and the body hit hard
> enough to break the tabs, which means the unit can't be flown without some jury
> rigging.  The fin unit isn't in the Estes catalog, and when I called them to
> inquire about purchasing one (and I made it clear the damage was not their
> fault) they sent out a replacement fin unit for free.

The particular type of plastic that Estes uses for clear fin units can't
take any abuse at all.  The first time I saw it used was on their R2D2.  
I have one that I've flown maybe four times.  Every flight was successful,
but even on a good parachute the model can come down hard on those fins.
They're cracked now, and so I won't fly the model.  (They also are damaged
real good by engine exhaust.)  

They used the same fin unit on their MX and Titan models of seven(?) years
ago.  Same problem.  The fins break.  On my particular model, one of the
attachment tabs broke, meaning that I can't fly the model.  (It broke in
transport -- the model has NEVER flown.)

Given that they've used the same fin unit on three kits already (MX, Titan,
and Bailout) you would think they'd carry it in their catalog!  Why not?

Joe Bob says, "No sir -- I don't like it."
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets,rec.models.rc
From: ericj@hwcae.Honeywell.COM (Eric Jacobsen)
Subject: Re: Astrocam
Organization: Honeywell, Air Transport Division; Phoenix, AZ
	<Btq7Bx.5GG@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> <BtuoJx.4E0@world.std.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 19:40:52 GMT

In article <BtuoJx.4E0@world.std.com> jlw@world.std.com (James L Walker) writes:

   Xref: src.honeywell.com rec.models.rockets:5399 rec.models.rc:10290
   Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets,rec.models.rc
From: jsvrc@rc.rit.edu (J A Stephen Viggiano)
Subject: Re: DOT/CPSC/FAA Situation
Organization: RIT Research Corp
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 21:48:09 GMT

In article <5929@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:

>Fred attempted to work with AeroTech and was rebuffed with double-speak.
>I suppose he could have contacted the NAR, but I doubt it would have 
>done anything but delay the inevitable confiscation.

Why am I not surprised to hear this about Aerotech????? Could it have
anything to do with the yellow piece of paper in my Initiator kit? The
one that says its okay to launch with an F or G, because it will be lighter
than one pound by the time it reaches 1200 feet AGL?

Yes, folks, I think that Aerotech's products are great. But I must
strenuously take exception to their all-to-frequent habit of playing
fast and loose with the rules. It's getting to the point where I'm going
to have to take anything Aerotech says with much more than a grain of salt.
I would expect our beloved bureaucrats to feel likewise.

>The California reload situation did not result in a crippled hobby, in 
>any sense of the word.  It had no repercussions outside California. . . .

Well our federal and state agencies might not be as efficient as they could
be, and they don't cooperate to the fullest extent possible, but I can
picture a CPSC, DOT, or NFPA official meeting someone from the California
Fire Marshall's office at a conference or something, and the conversation
turning to all the end-runs being made around the regulations. I don't
think it puts our hobby in the best light by having a company that otherwise
would be an important leader thumbing its nose at the rules.

There is no reason to be any less pissed off at Aerotech than at Estes and
Vulcan. The shenanigans any one of them has pulled is deplorable. Collectively,
they could give an outsider the completely wrong impression of what we're
about. We didn't get to where we are today by cutting corners on the Saftey
Code, and I, for one, look to the manufacturers to show the same reverence for
the rules of the game. Come on, Gary, Barry, and (who is the big shot at
Vulcan?) -- We want you to lead our hobby on to bigger and better things,
not have it hamstrung by infighting, reactive knee-jerk bureaucratic reactions
to playing fast & loose with regulations, etc.

John Viggiano, jsvrc@rc.rit.edu
NAR 25615
From: sc5@prism.gatech.EDU (CSEPLO,STEPHEN P)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: 'Tiger tail' igniters
Keywords: igniters
Date: 26 Aug 92 13:00:14 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

I don't know if this is accurate, but the ignitors you're talking
about sort of sound like the old Sure Shot ignitors by Centuri. Those
worked like a charm, but they're no longer made.

PS: My BAR routine has been postponed due to rain the past several
weekends. It's real discouraging as everything is set to go but
like NASA we're in a hold for weather.

Later.

-- 

The Mad Hata  

"Hey, Mon....Tako Kichi!"
From: leadfoot@bigbootay.sw.stratus.com (Mark Curtis)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: LDRS XI - trip report(adendum)
Date: 1 Sep 92 01:27:16 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.193359.2746@axis.dsg.ti.com>, barrett@add.itg.ti.com writes:
|> 
|>   Oh yeah one more neat thing I saw was a launch of a LOC Bruiser using
|> 37 (yes 15+15+7) Estes D12's!!  It used flashbulbs (37 of them too!) to
|> get them ignited.  The wiring looked like something out of a 1950's SF
|> movie.
|> 
|>   Anyway, most of use were pretty skeptical about the probablity of
|> success....  However, the thing flew pretty well!!  It was a sight that
|> just made you shake your head and grin....  ;-)

Did all 37 light?  It flew great, but I always wondered and never heard
if ALL 37 lit.  35 or 36 out of 37 would have been great work in my book.
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Nike v.s. Mosquito
Date: 4 Sep 92 18:14:24 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Sep4.151043.26649@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>, mdavis@alex (M. Davis) writes:
> The reasons behind the "miracle" of recovering a Mosquito include its size,
> speed, and potential altitude.  As was mentioned here a few days ago, you
> can't watch a Mosquito "take-off."  It just disappears.  If you're lucky  
> (a small engine helps), you may catch sight of its smoke trail during the  
> delay, or a puff as the engine ejects.  If you do manage to catch sight of
> it again, your only hope is to avoid blinking until it is on the ground
> and you've located a landmark near where it hit.

The REAL miracle is that the Mosquito comes down in two pieces: rocket
and engine.  The engine, being a simple cylinder, tumbles in and is VERY
visible.  The model, being stable, zooms back to the ground much faster
than the engine, and has already landed somewhere by the time the people
watching the engine come back have figured out that they are NOT watching
the right piece!  The trick is to IGNORE the obvious artifact and look for
the sneaky one!
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets