HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hack@arabia.uucp (Edmund Hack)
Subject: Re: Ignition Systems
Organization: Lockheed ESC, Houston
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 13:58:57 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.062240.24741@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com> billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
>hack@aio.jsc.nasa.gov (Edmund Hack) writes:
>: I am looking at building my own ignition system for both Model Rocket
>: and HPR use.  I have plans from a local Tripoli member for a relay-based
>: system.  The basic concept for those who haven't seen one is to use a
>: two part system.  A hand controller is used to close a relay located at
>: the launch pad, which is connected to a motorcycle battery at the pad.
>: This allows one to be a good distance from the pad at launch time (up to
>: 300 feet) without the resistive losses killing the launch current.
>
>Be very careful with this approach. I was at a high power launch where
>a rocket was accidentally launched when the jack on the controller shorted.
>
>I would never use a controller that simply closed a relay at the pad. I
>would always have the battery power for the relay in the controller
>itself. 

Absolutely.  There are 2 batteries required: One in the hand controller
and one at the pad.

>That way, if the controller cable is shorted, you do not get
>an unexpected ignition.
>
The DIN plugs that the design uses should be non-shorting.  I'll have to
look them up in the parts books here to absolutely sure.  In addition,
there are two key switches in the design, one at the pad, one at the
hand control.
-- 
| Edmund Hack - Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Co. - Houston, TX
| hack@aio.jsc.nasa.gov    SpokesPersonp(Me,or(NASA,LESC)) = NIL
| "No the game never ends when your whole
|       world depends on the turn of a friendly card"
From: jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Micro Video
Date: 20 Aug 92 22:40:51 GMT
Reply-To: jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty)
Organization: Robotic Midwives, Ltd.

In article <20AUG199211340700@vx.cis.umn.edu> soc1070 writes:

>Other advantages to this little gem (in addition to being able to 
>loft it with a D) would be 1) if it prangs you are to out the cost of
>the receiver/recorder mechanics; 2) since it transmits in real time,
>you can get that prang an video; 3) the whole setup is *much* cheaper
>the a current super-8 video camera. The camera is model PC-3 and lists
>for $190, and the receiver lists for $135.

I saw that same blurb, and you're leaving out an important part: the
camera is just that, only a camera. The blurb specifically stresses
that you need a transmitter for remote work, e.g. the RC application.

Another thing, this is out of my field, but isn't a Ham (or equilvalent)
licence required to broadcast video? Still, it's true that the camera
and transmitter together would be much cheaper than a super-8 camcorder
(which you'd have to hack to fit into even an HPR payload section) and
is generally conceded to not work anyway due to acceleration loads on
the tape drive.

- Jack

=============================================================================
||Jack Hagerty, Robotic Midwives, Ltd.                 jack@rml.com        ||
||Livermore, CA		           NOTE! New, improved address! ^^^        ||
||(510) 455-1143	            (old ones will still work)             ||
||-------------------------------------------------------------------------||
||               "Do or not do. There is no try." - Yoda                   ||
=============================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: buzz@rsd.dl.nec.com (Buzz McDermott)
Subject: Re: FAQ-2?
Organization: NEC America, Radio Software Dept
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 15:07:54 GMT

In article <543@rml.UUCP>, jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty) writes:
|> Hey! I never got part 2 of the FAQ! I checked my spool directory
|> and it's not there (although part 1 is still there chewing up a
|> sizable chunk of disk :-)
|> 
|> Did it not go out or did distribution choke somewhere on the way here?
|> 

It went out, though I left off the subject line!

The FAQ is posted in 2 parts.  If other sites didn't get Part 2 (untitled :-()
reply to me via email.  If it didn't show up out there I`ll repost it.  Jack, 
if you need a copy I`ll be happy to mail one to you.

Hopefully, I'll have this thing set up on the FAQ server in the near future.
It will then get posted, titled(!), etc., on time, automatically, every month.

============================================================================
Buzz McDermott                   Internet: buzz@rsd.dl.nec.com
NAR 13559
TRA  1785
============================================================================
From: rbs@cyclops.micr.Virginia.EDU (Robert B. Sisk)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: New AmSpam Editor?
Date: 20 Aug 92 14:37:02 GMT
Organization: University of Virginia

In article <YeYtvcW00WB2ARXFMP@andrew.cmu.edu> lc2b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Lawrence Curcio) writes:
>Just a comment here: AMSPAM policy makes it an unattractive proposition
>to contribute. You send in an article and it immediately becomes their
>property. They don't tell you whether it was rejected or not, and even
>if it is accepted, you see nothing for months. In any case, you lose all
>the rights. Why not contibute to, say, PROBE instead?
>
>-Larry

OK, what is "PROBE"?

Bob
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert B. Sisk  PhD			Internet: rbs@virginia.edu
NAR #53448				UUCP:     uunet!virginia!rbs
TRIPOLI #1583                           CIS:      71501.1651@CompuServe.COM
From: jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Astrocam Breakthrough
Date: 19 Aug 92 00:01:21 GMT
Reply-To: jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty)
Organization: Robotic Midwives, Ltd.

In article <5618@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
>In article <544@rml.UUCP>, jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty) writes:
>> The image was generally good, if a little off center and slightly 
>> blurred due to motion. Still, you can pick out the people, cars, 
>> prep tents and even the Tripoli launch pads (the white Mantis pads 
>> used for the model rockets just blend into the white lakebed).
>
>Was that the launch I aimed?  I've forgotten.  

As a matter of fact, it was. I forgot to thank you publically, so
I'll do it now. Thanks! The only down side was that the field of 
view stopped just short of getting the Sport Range in it.

>I'd love to get
>a copy of the photo to print in our next newsletter.  I'm getting
>real good with Photoshop, I could just PAINT IN the Mantis launchers.

I've just returned from a second trip to the 1 Hr photo where I
brought in *all* of my previous Astrocam negatives to have them
flip printed. I made 2 of each of the NARAM ones (including a 
ground shot of you, Chris, manning the launch panel) to send to Larry
as sort of a NARAM/Astrocam gallery. You're welcome to my "unflipped"
(i.e. backwards) shot right now, or you can wait a few days and I'll 
have another flipped one printed, although I imagine Photoshop can 
flip images easily enough.

On the same subject, I've exchanged mail with Tom Beach over on CIS
and he just got his film back from his 4 "dual" launches. Says he
got some "good" shots and some "boring" shots. I told him that no
Astrocam flight with recognizable images is boring, just amazing :-)

- Jack

=============================================================================
||Jack Hagerty, Robotic Midwives, Ltd.                 jack@rml.com        ||
||Livermore, CA		           NOTE! New, improved address! ^^^        ||
||(510) 455-1143	            (old ones will still work)             ||
||-------------------------------------------------------------------------||
||               "Do or not do. There is no try." - Yoda                   ||
=============================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: george@intelhf.hf.intel.com (George Rachor)
Subject: Re: Rocket to the moon?
Organization: Development Tools Operation, Intel Corp., Hillsboro  OR
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 20:18:18 GMT

From article <1992Aug17.174842.24530@primerd.prime.com>, by Jim Cook <J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM>:
> In article <1992Aug15.185530.24458@cc.tut.fi> jk87377@cc.tut.fi (Juhana Kouhia)
> writes:
> 
>>I read a while this group when this was greated a long ago.
>>There was a discussion on sending a rocket to the moon.
>>What happened? (I guess it never happened.)
>>
>>Juhana Kouhia
> 
> I asked the same question at the beginning after a lapse of six months.
> 
> You guessed correctly; other than a spate of discussion, nothing really came
> of it.  Too much cost, too small total impulses, and problems with the total
> thrust to drag ratios as discussed elsewhere make this impractical for all
> intents and purposes.  A pity.
> 
> J
>

Here is a what if?

Assume that you could launch a model rocket from earth orbit.  
(A Get away special from the shuttle comes to mind -- pretty doubtful)

Given the fixed container of a GAS could a model rocket package be 
assembled that could impact the moon?

 
-- 
George L. Rachor Jr.
Prefered mail address:
george@endeavor.intel.com
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Ignition Systems
Keywords: ignition GSE launcher relay continuity
Date: 19 Aug 92 17:51:33 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Aug18.184050.27806@ultb.isc.rit.edu>, jsvrc@rc.rit.edu (J A Stephen Viggiano) writes:
> Relays are okay, but transistors are better. Why not go solid state?

Well, the Tripoli pads at the National Sport Launch went through about
six 10A fuses!  Maybe there are transistors that can deliver that kind
of power, but they sound like something that might carry a price tag I 
can't hack...
-- 

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: hughes@gary.enet.dec.com (Gary Hughes - VMS Development)
Subject: Re: Estes composites (was Where did my rocket go??)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 18:28:08 GMT


In article <549@rml.UUCP>, jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty) writes...
>According to Mike Hellmund, Estes is going to continue making all 
>of their motors (ahem) right there on the Penrose site. He wasn't clear
>(and I didn't press him) as to whether that meant a new production
>facility for the composites. I can't imagine otherwise, since the
>manufacturing process for composites is quite a bit different than
>for black powder.

Random factoid... there have been composite propellants developed that can be
loaded like black powder. They were developed to allow the use of existing
equipment for military pyrotechnics.

I have NO idea if Estes is planning anything like this. I have often suspected
that the reason some of the eastern European countries use picrate based
propellants is because some of those can be compression loaded like BP (and
they are probably used for military pyro and therefore available).

gary
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Micro Video
Date: 20 Aug 92 19:15:24 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <20AUG199211340700@vx.cis.umn.edu>, soc1070 writes:
> 3) the whole setup is *much* cheaper
> the a current super-8 video camera. The camera is model PC-3 and lists
> for $190, and the receiver lists for $135.

Nooooo, not QUITE.  You forgot to add in the cost of the transmitter,
which boosts the price even further.  And that camera is the B&W one --
the color one is even more expensive.  An entire setup with the color
camera comes out to something like $900.

We did a semi-review of these modules in our most recent newsletter,
complete with video frames.
-- 

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 composites (was Where did my rocket go??)
Keywords: Tracking
Date: 19 Aug 92 17:07:49 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <549@rml.UUCP>, jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty) writes:
> Gee, I wonder what's going to happen to the "Mighty `D' Engine" slogan :-)

It will now say:  "Mite-y D Engine!"
-- 

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: jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Gassaway's Shuttle (was: Reloads Shippin Again)
Date: 22 Aug 92 21:18:53 GMT
Reply-To: jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty)
Organization: Robotic Midwives, Ltd.

In article <1992Aug21.223709.26509@cbnewse.cb.att.com> mckiou@cbnewse.cb.att.com (kevin.w.mckiou) writes:
>
>On a (sort of) related note, I understand that George had a rather 
>spectacular flight with his Orbiter at NARAM-34 using the RC RMS-32 
>system. Did anyone see it fly?  I heard he thermaled it for 3 minutes.  
>If anyone attended and feels energetic enough to post a report, 
>I'd read it! <G>

If you mean his model of the Shuttle Orbiter, I saw it fly. It only
glided for about a minute (unless he flew it more than once, I only
caught one flight). Acutally everyone was amazed that it stayed up
that long. There were no thermals as the wind was quite brisk by that 
time. The only reason he got even that much time was he managed to
steer it into the wind. The comments I heard floating around were
"Only George could make a brick like that fly!" and "How'd he *do*
that anyway?"

It was very impressive that it flew at all, and he got about twice
the glide slope of the NASA version :-)

- Jack


=============================================================================
||Jack Hagerty, Robotic Midwives, Ltd.                 jack@rml.com        ||
||Livermore, CA		           NOTE! New, improved address! ^^^        ||
||(510) 455-1143	            (old ones will still work)             ||
||-------------------------------------------------------------------------||
||               "Do or not do. There is no try." - Yoda                   ||
=============================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: buzz@rsd.dl.nec.com (Buzz McDermott)
Subject: Re: RE: B14's
Organization: NEC America, Radio Software Dept
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 22:33:09 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.195419.7488@primerd.prime.com>, Jim Cook <J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM> writes:
|> In article <19668@plains.NoDak.edu> enders@bolshoi.cc.misu.NoDak.edu (Todd
|> Enders) writes:
|> >Gary Hughes - VMS Development writes
|> >> 
|> >> (stuff deleted)
|> But why isn't there a composite B14?  Or, why not redesign the nozzle
|> >(larger throat diameter) to allow a larger diameter core that *could* be
|> >loaded in a more convensional fashion.
|> 
You can get a C10 composite motor (18mm x something < 2") from Apogee.  It's
EXPENSIVE ($8) though.

Aetotech has B & C reloads for the 18mm casing.  At least one of the smaller
reloads is high impulse.

Aerotech makes a D21 in a standard 18mm x 2 3/4" casing, not to mention an 
E25.  These are approx. $4-5 ea., mail order.

============================================================================
Buzz McDermott                   Internet: buzz@rsd.dl.nec.com
NAR 13559
TRA  1785
============================================================================
From: jsvrc@rc.rit.edu (J A Stephen Viggiano)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Ignition Systems
Keywords: ignition GSE launcher relay
Date: 20 Aug 92 15:18:40 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: RIT Research Corp

In article <5677@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:

>Well, the Tripoli pads at the National Sport Launch went through about
>six 10A fuses!  Maybe there are transistors that can deliver that kind
>of power, but they sound like something that might carry a price tag I 
>can't hack...

Sure there are transistors that can handle that amount of current, and much
more, too. They're called "power transistors." :^) Typical collector
currents range from 10 to 100 amperes. Prices are usually well below that of
a heavy-duty relay.

I can't find the SK databook right now (the guy who's in charge of it is
on vacation), so I can't give you part numbers right now.

John Viggiano, jsvrc@rc.rit.edu
NAR 25615
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: DOT/CPSC/FAA Situation
Date: 17 Aug 92 21:07:34 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Aug12.194314.7184@primerd.prime.com>, J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM (Jim Cook) writes:
> 1. If you are on the Tripoli side of the fence, you might speak to Chuck
>    Rodgers who is your NFPA representative.  He failed to even vote when
>    the ballot for the TIA to NFPA 1122 to allow re-loads came out.  The
>    amendment failed to pass due to a lack of enough positive votes.

OK, since I've been the one most publicly fuming about this one, I should
be the one to lay it to rest.  I now understand Chuck was on his honeymoon!
That's a good enough excuse for me... THIS TIME!  :-)

By the way, with or without Chuck's vote, the yes votes weren't even close.
-- 

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: Jim Cook <J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM>
Subject: Re: VECTORED THRUST (The Big Boys)
Reply-To: <J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM>
Organization: Prime Computer, Inc.
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 19:56:29 GMT

In article <1992Aug11.185643.29629@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
rbs@cyclops.micr.Virginia.EDU (Robert B. Sisk) writes:
>
> Several recent postings have mentioned controllable vectored thrust.
>

The strap-on boosters for a Titan-III/IV are semi-vectored, I believe,
by the injection of <<?>> from red external tanks.

The strap-ons on the Space Shuttle (I think) are vectored by external
nozzle steering actuators, but I could be wrong.

J

Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: coryc@sequent.com (Cory Carpenter)
Subject: Re: Altitude Busters at LDRS
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems Inc.
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 21:41:08 GMT

In article <171g3pINNd3t@runamok.hal.COM> chuckh@hal.COM (Chuck Heron) writes:
>(This is my second try at posting this, sorry if there are two versions)
>I attended LDRS on Saturday and Sunday, and I must say, It was spectacular!
>It's now on my list of annual road trips.
>Blackrock Desert is a great place in itself (as long as you don't mind a
>little dust.)
>
>What happened with these altitude busting 50,000ft N-N rockets that were
>supposed to break records.
>Did I miss them (wrong day/not paying attention)?
>The best I heard about/saw was one that was tracked at 24,600ft
>which got close, but didn't break the record.
>
>I'd also like to hear more about what happened on Monday at BALLS
>(had to go to work monday morning)

"Pad 99," a group called John's Hopkins (or someone in the group was
named John Hopkins... I wasn't too clear on that) launched something
toward the end of the day that went *very* high.  Unfortunately, the
trackers had already come in, and BALLS was not Tripoli sanctioned, so
my understanding is that no official altitudes were generated.  (I could
be wrong on that -- any corrections?)  The group at Pad 99 did have a
radiosonde aboard, but I never heard whether it recorded the maximum
altitude.   (Very nice boost and airstart on the second stage though,
made for great video!)

>How high did this 40' 1000lb B.A.L.L.S. go, did it do better than the
>1:1 Patriot on Saturday? 

I don't think it went higher than 5000', but it was damn impressive
anyway:  Nice, slow, graceful liftoff, ejection just after apogee.  It
looked a lot like a "real" rocket.  And, since someone else asked, it
used 1 "O", 5 "L", and 8 "K" motors.  Any bets on what'll be on the
cover of an upcoming Tripolitan?   `^)

Expect to see this one launched again, as the recovery was perfect.  (As
far as I could tell from 1.5 miles away, the "line of death" mandated by
the RSO and the LeMoth (sp?) group.)

>Is anyone planning on doing some sort of summary?
>I'd like to hear some highlights on who got big altitudes
>with what motors/configurations. (I was pretty far from the PA for a lot
>of the time, and missed a lot of the stats)

This is my biggest beef about the whole Black Rock experience:  I missed
a lot of good launches because of the weenie PA system -- seems like
they could have also hooked the PA into a CB with an open mike, as a lot
of people there had CBs... .

-coryc
-- 
|     >> Disclaimer: I speak for Sequent only in our hardware manuals <<     |
| Cory R. Carpenter, Tech Writer |  The world hadn't ever had so many moving |
| Sequent Computer Systems, Inc. |  parts or so few labels.                  |
|  coryc@sequent.com             |   --William Gibson, `Mona Lisa Overdrive' |
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: buzz@rsd.dl.nec.com (Buzz McDermott)
Subject: Tripoli DOT/Reload Legal Fund
Organization: NEC America, Radio Software Dept
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 20:39:53 GMT

I received the following message from Ed LaCroix of Apogee Components via 
CompuServe/Internet link.  I am forwarding it to r.m.r at his request.
I know nothing about the legal fund mentioned in this message.


***** Begin Ed LaCroix's message
Buzz-
Could I ask you to do me a favor and post the following to Internet where the
rocket folks will see it? I would appreciate it. Thank you!

Ed/Apogee

Greetings Everyone-

Just this afternoon, 13 August, 1992, the Tripoli Board of Directors
unanimously voted (G. Rosenfield abstaining) to establish a Rocketry Legal Fund
 within Tripoli. The immediate purpose of the Legal Fund will be to place on
retainer Mr. Larry Bierlein of the Washington, D.C. law firm of Shaw, Pittman,
Potts, and Trowbridge (the same law firm the NAR has engaged to handle the FAA
regulatory quagmire). Mr. Bierlein is a specialist in DOT regulatory issues and
his sole purpose in this matter will be to establish a favorable industry-wide
resolution to the shipping restrictions recently placed on reloadable
technology by the DOT.

The cost of this legal assistance won't come cheaply, however. Mr. Bierlein's
retainer is $5000.00 and ultimately establishing an outcome favorable to *our*
hobby may cost upwards of $20,000.

Being that *funds are needed immediately*, NOW IS THE TIME to step forward and
be counted amongst the supporters of reloadable technology before self-serving 
individuals working in concert with the DOT place severe regulatory constraints
upon it.

Whether the contributor is an individual, manufacturer, dealer, or distributor,
*any* size donation is welcome and needed! Checks should be made out to:

                   Tripoli Rocketry Assoc.*Legal Fund*
                 (be sure the check references Legal Fund!)

                    and contributions should be sent to:

                       Tripoli Rocketry Association
                   c/o Scott Dingman
                       P.O. Box 339
                       Kenner, LA  70063-0339
***** End Ed LaCroix's message

============================================================================
Buzz McDermott                   Internet: buzz@rsd.dl.nec.com
NAR  13559
TRA   1785
============================================================================