HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: Altitude Test (Long)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 10:47:59 GMT

lc2b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Lawrence Curcio) writes:

: than 0.25 seconds apart. We judged apogee as the moment when the
: rocket, which we took to be ascending vertically, cocked ever-so-
: slightly. (The day was overcast, and there were no good visual cues

If the rocket is ascending absolutely vertically, it is still rising
when it starts to cock over. It has quit rising when it is approximately
horizontal - depending on Cp/Cg of the rocket.

: for apogee.) If the rocket were slightly off-vertical, then the
: proper time would have been the moment when the rocket was
: horizontal. Since the wind was blowing about 15 mph at ground
: level, this may well have been the appropriate moment in this test
: (Weathercocking). Indeed, I accidentally timed this moment on one
: flight (oddly, the second timer missed this one as well, and the
: optical data didn't converge), and the corresponding altitude was
: comparable to the optical altitudes for the other flights. This was
: a full second longer than average for the SKYHAWK. In that second,
: the rocket likely travelled very little, so the optical altitudes
: were OK, within experimental error. The omission of that second
: made a large difference in the temporal estimate. 

If the rocket were perfectly streamlined, or flying in a vacuum, then
it would travel 16 feet in the second either before or after turnover.

Bill

Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Re: Astro-(disposable)-cam
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 00:55:00 GMT

>Playing with one of the disposables in my desk drawer, I have just found that
>by holding down the fire button while advancing the film that these
>cameras do have a "continuous firing" mode!  (The ones I happen to have here
>with me are all Kodak Panoramics.)  They have a built in counter which limits
>them to 12 frames, but by removing the counter/cam disk on which the numbers are
>displayed, I can get as many exposures as there are in the roll of film.  All
>I have to do is hold down the shutter button and advance the film to get as
>many exposures as I want!  And it looks like the wind rate can easily be
>above 2 frames a second!  This is great!  Now all I need is to find the
>mechanism to wind the film, maybe a disassembled windup toy car will do.

Wow! I can think of a really cheap way to feed these too.. buy bulk 
film! C-41 film is available in 100 foot lengths. B&W film is even 
cheaper! 

I'll have to get my hands on one of the things...start playing with 
them too.



-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: snouty@cix.compulink.co.uk (Phil South)
Subject: Using RMR text in newsletter
Reply-To: snouty@cix.compulink.co.uk
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 22:07:00 +0000


Just a note to ask if anyone minds if I use any tips or other text
from this newsgroup in my UK rocket newsletter "Modrocs"?

many thanks

Phil


 ============================================================
 Phil South                  | aka. "Snouty"
 FONE: +44 373 836889        | Freelance Writer
 snouty@compulink.co.uk      |===============================
 uad1135@dircon.com.UUCP     | No job too big, no FEE too big
 ============================================================

Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: buzz@rsd.dl.nec.com (Buzz McDermott)
Subject: Re: Dallas Area Competition
Organization: NEC America, Radio Software Dept
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 23:32:35 GMT

In article <19920915165849.Roger.Wilfong@umich.edu>, <Roger.Wilfong@umich.edu>  (Roger Wilfong) writes:
|> CDT - 
|> I am confused (again) over 'authorized agent' and 'sanctioned event'.
|>  To which sanctioned events does this apply?  
|>  Is the director of a sport launch an authorized agent for this purpose?
|>  How about a contest director?  
|>  Do you have to specify that HP certification will be part of the event when 
|>     you apply for the sanction?
|> I think an explaination of this issue would be a good topic for one of Pat's
|> columns.

I second the motion!

I'm equally confused at this point, even after my direct email with you, CD.
This is an interesting enough point that I'd like to put it in the FAQ section
on HPR certification (if I can ever figure it out, that is :-).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buzz McDermott
NAR   13559
TRA    1785
Internet Address:  buzz@rsd.dl.nec.com
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: soc1070                         
Subject: Re: Night Launches?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Minnesota CIS
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 14:45:00 GMT

In article <BuFLys.81M@acsu.buffalo.edu>, ztsindi@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (The Independents - SUNY Buffalo) writes...
>Howdy!
>	How many of you illustrious Rocketeers have done night 
>launches? Finding the rocket seems to be the problem here, though
>I can think of two solutions right away; A tiny light on the rocket
>(blinking would help) or maybe a large dayglo chute. Any other 
>solutions? What are your recollections of a night launch? Oh, has
>anyone done a night launch with an AstroCam or Cineroc? THAT would
>make interesting pictures, at least there would be no 'blue sky' 
>shots...


 						- Joe
Yep. I have done a couple of night launches last summer.

What I did was REAL simple: I bought a cylume light stik and cracked
it a little before flying time (so I could see to prep the model in
the dark - not to worry, they *burn* for a couple hours...). The 
Cylume brand sticks are about six inches long and have a ring to
tie on a string (for campers and trick-or-treaters). I took an
additional snap swivel and clipped it through the ring on the light
stick and too the nose cone. I then stuffed the whole works into
the BT-60 body of my Red Max (THAT model again!), and flew the rocket
on a C6-5.

When the chute ejects, the light stick is dangeling from the nose and was 
very bright and easy to spot.

Tim Harincar			"Always listen to experts.			
Central Minnesota 		They'll tell you what can't
Association of Rocketry		be done and why. Then do it."
soc1070@vx.acs.umn.edu			-Lazarus Long
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: barrett@add.itg.ti.com
Subject: Tracking powder
Organization: Texas Instruments, Austin, Tx.
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 17:49:53 GMT

  Has anyone figured out a way to put tracking powder (i.e.  carpenters
chalk) in a rocket and not get it all over everything?  I currently use
the procedure of just dumping 1/2 cup or so in the body tube so that it
comes out when the chute ejects.  It stains the chute, and the outside
of the rocket on occasion.  It is impossible to remove.

  I have been thinking of putting it into a plastic bag, but I want the
contents to pour out at ejection and not have a bag full of powder
falling down.

  I could get real complicated and make a separate chamber and use a
timer/pryo-device to eject it.  But I would like to keep it simple (and
clean!).

Any ideas?

Stu Barrett  TRA#1277  NAR# 4341
From: jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Astrocam 110 Film
Keywords: 400 speed 110 film still being produced?
Date: 5 Sep 92 19:20:37 GMT
Reply-To: jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty)
Organization: Robotic Midwives, Ltd.

In article <Bu372p.G3C@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib) writes:
>
>Hmmm.. you know, I'd be very surprised if 400 ASA 110 film was 
>being discontinued by _every_ manufacturer, even if one or two 
>decided to discontinue it. It would be one heck of a conspiracy
>... 9-)  It might take place over a period of years but not
>all at once..

Even if it did disappear, I wouldn't sweat it. I've had good luck flying 
my Astrocam using 200 ASA film made by 3M (sold through K-Mart and other
"house" brands). I just put the instructions "Please push one stop, camera 
was set to 400" on the envelope and it's worked every time.

I've also used gen-u-wine Kodacolor 400 (for the flights at NARAM) and 
didn't notice any difference in image density.

The main advantage I've found to the 200 speed film is that it comes
in 12 exposure rolls for about $2 compared to the Kodacolor 400 which
comes only in 24 exposure rolls for $6. A 12 exposure roll is just 
about perfect for a flying session: 3 or 4 flight shots with the rest
used as the recommended "blank" shot in between and a few ground shots
of the folks hanging around watching you fly.

- Jack



=============================================================================
||Jack Hagerty, Robotic Midwives, Ltd.                 jack@rml.com        ||
||Livermore, CA		           NOTE! New, improved address! ^^^        ||
||(510) 455-1143	            (old ones will still work)             ||
||-------------------------------------------------------------------------||
||  "Stay on the bomb run, boys. I'm gonna get them bomb doors open        ||
||    if it harelips ever'one on Bear Creek!" -  Major "King" Kong         ||
=============================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Re: Astro-Blaster Mod
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 03:58:52 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.164242.20576@primerd.prime.com> <J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM> writes:

>So, I take it that you never flew it RC, but always flew it complete hands-off
>for the entire flight?

What I think he means is that if the glider is too nose-heavy it
will require a lot of "up" elevator to keep it flying level (on a 
canard this is actually "down foreplane"). The result of this is 
a strong pitch-up moment if the airplane's speed is increased. This 
is counterbalanced by the Astro-Blaster's high thrust line during
the boost, which provides a nose-down pitch. At burnout, however, 
the thrust is suddenly removed while airspeed is still very high. 
Now, the nose-down moment due to thrust is gone but the nose-up 
pitching moment due to the glider's trim and airspeed still exists,
so the glider pitches up suddenly. Hard to control something as 
sudden as that. 

Incidentally when trimming C/L combat airplanes you can tell if 
you've inadvertantly built up or down thrust into it by the way 
it behaves upon "burnout". If it suddenly pitches up you had some
downthrust and were unconsciously holding up elevator, for in-
stance. 






-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Roger.Wilfong@umich.edu (A. Roger Wilfong)
Subject: Re: Scale rocket competition
Organization: U of Michigan - Information & Networking Services
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 13:06:10 GMT

In article <BuFyr1.B4I@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
(Iskandar Taib) writes:
>In article <1992Sep2.111207.20489@med.umich.edu> Roger.Wilfong@umich.edu
writes:
>>In article <6082@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
>>writes:
>>>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.
>
>>Jerry Brown has never made rocket motors - just Linda.
>
>
>OK whats the deal here? Some embarassing historical skeleton
>in the closet from the dawn of hi-power?  9-)
>
Yes and nooooo.  There was a comercial terrorist who was first booted out of
the NAR (tarred, feathered, sued - all those good things) this was
pre-LDRS/Tripoli.  He then became involved with Triploi and followed a similar
course.  If you are interested in how he operated, he is refered to in a
Tripolitan/HPRocketry article on Lucerne a couple of issues back as "the former
management".
 
Anyone involved in U.S. ROCKETry (and some in Canada) long enough has some
horror/humor story about him.  I seem to remember the the NAR board gave CDT a
tee shirt indicating he was a member of this guy's fan club.  SNOAR NEWS had a
continuous harrange going.

BTW - Speaking of SNOAR NEWS, did Matt get an issue out intime for NARAM this
year?
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Re: Estes composites (was Where did my rocket go??)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 04:30:22 GMT

In article <10490018@hpfcmgw.FC.HP.COM> bo@hpfcmgw.FC.HP.COM (Bo Viger) writes:
>>Roger.Wilfong@umich.edu writes:
>>
>>BTW - I have noticed a strange phenomenom as regards reloadable motors.  While
>>a couple years ago, it seemed a couple of years ago, HP rockets were almost
>>treated as throwaways - blast them out of sight and if we never see it again...
>>well so goes the war.  Suddenly with reloads, this attitude seems to be
>>changing.  Add a $60 motor casing to a $100 rocket and people are crying - not
>>about loosing the rocket (that took them a lot of time to build and finish) -
>>but about loosing the casing.
>>
>>Is this a real phenomenom?  Has any one else noticed it?  or am I just nuts? 

Perhaps one way to think about it is what the alternative would be. If
one flew an expendable one would have lost the rocket + an expendable
($10?) while if one flew the reloadable you'd be out the rocket + the
casing ($60). The only way to not risk losing the rocket is not to fly
it, and what good is a rocket unless you fly it? Whereas there is an al-
ternative to flying the reloadable.









-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: Astro-(disposable)-cam
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 02:29:29 GMT

jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty) writes:
: In article <12SEP199210232795@erin.caltech.edu> shoppa@erin.caltech.edu (TIM SHOPPA) writes:
: >Hmm.  More complex than what I had originally envisioned.  I'm a nuclear
: >theorist, not a mechanical engineer (to mangle Dr. McCoy's famous line 
: >from Star Trek) so I'll try it the simple way first.  If you can come up
: >with some definite plans for such a mechanism, let me know, and I'll try
: >to make it with my admittedly limited machine shop skills.  
: 
: You could try using a segmented gear. I'm not sure what the film advance
: mechaninsm is like in a disposable, but if there is any possibility of 
: driving it with a gear, then use one that has teeth on only part of it's 
: perimiter. Put the shutter-tripping lever on the "blank" part of the gear 
: and you'll have a primitive cam that will advance the film during part 
: of its revolution then trip the shutter on the other; all with continuous
: (not intermitent or recipricating) motor movement.

Good idea. That would simplify the mechanism quite a bit. That would also
clear up the problem of relieving the spring tension that would be required
with a lever. The only problem would be making the segmented gear with the
exact number of teeth required. Make it spring loaded so it has a few degrees
of leeway?

Bill
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: 3-Observer Tracking (Long)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 10:36:50 GMT

lc2b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Lawrence Curcio) writes:
: 
: The trackers were 135 feet apart from each other, arranged along a
: straight line. The center observer was approximately 300 feet from
: the launch rod. Each (elevation-only) tracking instrument was made
: from a protractor, a yardstick, a string and a weight. A BASIC
: program is included in a separate post to reduce the three
: elevation angles to X, Y, and Z(altitude) measurements in a
: coordinate system with the center observer as the origin. 

Your accuracy would have been increased, if you had the azimuth
angles available, as well as the altitude. Then you can run three
separate calulations of the altitude and see how well they close.

: Of the six flights, two had impossible data, and a third gave an
: absurd altitude. It turned out that the particular combination of
: angles on the absurd flight was very sensitive. A single degree
: more for the center observer would have given a reading about 600
: feet lower. Another degree more would have given a flight 700 feet
: lower. (The combination was 68, 64, and 60 degrees for the left,
: middle and right observer respectively.) 

As you noted in a part I am not quoting - longer base lines would
have helped.  You do not want the angle to get much over 45 degrees
for the altitude measurements. The error starts building rapidly.

You also need to make sure that the stations are taking the readings
at the same time - ideally, at the same instant.

Bill

: SUMMARY:
: My impression of the method, then, is that it requires a lot of
: room for good precision, and that error sensitivity checks must be
: performed before a track is accepted. ** In the context of near-
: vertical ascents with a launch rod at known coordinates, the lack
: of a redundant altitude reading is not a loss. ** Finally,
: impossible angle combinations are common in practice.

Yep. It also requires experienced trackers and good commumications.
Even well experienced teams often get closure to only about 20%, at
times. Sometimes, even worse.

Bill
From: mckiou@cbnewse.cb.att.com (kevin.w.mckiou)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Astro-Blaster Mod
Date: 11 Sep 92 03:52:49 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Sep10.164242.20576@primerd.prime.com> <J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM> writes:

>So, I take it that you never flew it RC, but always flew it complete 
>hands-off for the entire flight?
>
>J
>

Uhhh...NO!!!  There is nothing hands-off about this glider.  You have
to fly it.  Well, maybe you could let it boost hands off if you managed
to get launch angle and glide trim just right.  Come to think of it,
I guess it might be possible to fly it completely hands off if you trimmed
in a little turn.  I think you would still need to help it transition to 
glide.  It has no dihedral and if it transitioned inverted, it may make a 
big loop back into the ground.

Kevin
From: lc2b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Lawrence Curcio)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: TRACK3.BAS
Date: 8 Sep 92 03:29:13 GMT
Organization: Doctoral student, Urban and Public Affairs, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

10 REM PROGRAM TRACK3.BAS
20 REM BY LARRY CURCIO
30 REM 3-OBSERVER ELEVATION-ONLY OPTICAL TRACKING
40 REM METHOD DEVELOPED BY J. TALLY GUILL
50 REM COPYRIGHT 1992
60 REM UNCOMPENSATED DISTRIBUTION ALLOWED
70 PI = 3.14159265358979#
80 FACTOR = (PI + PI) / 360
90 CLS
100 INPUT "DISTANCE BETWEEN OBSERVERS ", D
110 PRINT
120 INPUT "COMPLEMENT THE ANGLES ? (1=YES, 2=N0) ", COMPSW
130 PRINT
140 PRINT
150 INPUT "ENTER ANGLE 1 ", ALPHA
160 INPUT "ENTER ANGLE 2 ", BETA
170 INPUT "ENTER ANGLE 3 ", GAMMA
180 PRINT
190 IF COMPSW <> 1 THEN 230
200 ALPHA = 90 - ALPHA
210 BETA = 90 - BETA
220 GAMMA = 90 - GAMMA
230 ALPHA = TAN(FACTOR * ALPHA)
240 BETA = TAN(FACTOR * BETA)
250 GAMMA = TAN(FACTOR * GAMMA)
260 ALPHA2 = ALPHA * ALPHA
270 BETA2 = BETA * BETA
280 GAMMA2 = GAMMA * GAMMA
290 X = D * BETA2 * (GAMMA2 - ALPHA2)
300 X = X / (2 * BETA2 * (GAMMA2 + ALPHA2) - 4 * ALPHA2 * GAMMA2)
310 Z = 2 / (BETA2 * (ALPHA2 + GAMMA2) - 2 * ALPHA2 * GAMMA2)
320 IF Z < 0 THEN 510
330 Z = SQR(Z) * D * ALPHA * BETA * GAMMA
340 Y = -99999!
350 IF GAMMA2 = ALPHA2 THEN 420
360 Y = 2 * D * X * (ALPHA2 + GAMMA2) / (GAMMA2 - ALPHA2)
370 Y = Y - D * D - X * X
380 IF Y > 0 THEN 400
390 Y = -99999!: GOTO 420
400 Y = SQR(Y)
410 GOTO 470
420 IF ALPHA2 = BETA2 THEN 470: REM CHECK THIS OUT !!!
430 Y = (BETA2 - ALPHA2) * X * X - ALPHA2 * D * D - 2 * ALPHA2 * D * X
440 IF Y > 0 THEN 460
450 Y = -99999!: GOTO 470
460 Y = SQR(Y / (ALPHA2 - BETA2))
470 PRINT "ALTITUDE   = ", Z
480 PRINT "Y DISTANCE = ", Y
490 PRINT "X DISTANCE = ", X
500 GOTO 520
510 PRINT "DATA DID NOT CONVERGE "
520 GOTO 130
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: jsvrc@rc.rit.edu (J A Stephen Viggiano)
Subject: Re: Ignition Systems
Organization: RIT Research Corp
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 15:20:43 GMT

In article <sedj0c600WB98vRmpk@andrew.cmu.edu> lc2b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Lawrence Curcio) writes:
>I was recently shocked to discover that several lines of guitar
>amplifiers still use tubes exclusively. Hard to believe...

Perhaps we should be using vacuum tubes in our launchers, too. You'll get a
much more "mellow" sound than with solid state, important for those large
composite launches. (Insert a :-) here for the humor-impaired.)

BTW, one reason the composite engines sound different from Black Powder is the
large difference in exhaust velocity: ca. Mach 2,5 for Black Powder, vs. ca.
Mach 6 for composite.
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: Dallas Area Competition
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 22:57:02 GMT

cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
: In article <1992Sep14.141614.2258@rsd0.rsd.dl.nec.com>, buzz@rsd.dl.nec.com (Buzz McDermott) writes:
: > The Dallas Area Rocket Society (DARS) will be hosting the Dallas Area No-
: > Name 1992, DANN-92, a two day Open Meet.
: 
: > NAR high power certification will be available.
: 
: I hope this means they will be sanctioning it as a Regional Sport Launch,
: so that people can do multiple steps in the same day.

Ah, has this been approved? Has the board decided to allow multiple
steps to be submitted for only one fee - instead of having to pay for
each step demonstrated on the same day?

Bill
From: J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM (Jim Cook)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Estes rumors
Date: 14 Sep 92 21:45:30 GMT
Reply-To: <J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM>
Organization: Prime Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Sep14.181255.21708@cbnewsd.cb.att.com>
rjungcla@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (R. M. Jungclas) writes:
>Recently heard some rumors on the 1993 Estes line that I'll pass
>along:
>
>
>    1.  Look for the Maxi Butes to return.  Maxi V-2, Maxi Honest John
>	and Maxi Pershing 1A.

It was said at NARAM-34 in Las Vegas that the Max Honest John would be the
next model in the Estes Collector Series, to be released in November.

Jim