l2 success

Cool off Woody,
If the model went up 100' tumbled out of control it would be an obvious DNR. Jim didn't say what angle it went off to. If it cocked
30 or 45 degrees and continued on would that be wrong? What if the model simply hit a wind gust? What will be interesting is if Jim does another flight on the model and it performs normal that would point to the random nature of the the flight parameters. The flight was completed to the letter of the rules. I am assuming here that the model is stable and suffered an external pertubation.
Kurt Savegnago
AZ Woody wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Then it doesn't sound like you know enough to be making any conclusions.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Phil Stein wrote:

Then neither do you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No shit. I didn't did I?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I see you certed with a nekkid rocket! (Eat your heart out Tom LOL) Way to go first of all. Questions though: 1. Did anyone else fly this day? And if so did they experience similar departures from the vertical? 2. If no others flights were completed was there any indication of strong winds aloft? 3. If there had been other flights and they had "weather cocked" as some would call it, why did you? If this is in fact what happened.
Finally I was not "there" so I have not the empiracal evidence to say otherwise and all the Monday Morning Quarterbacking does not help. We all could say you "could have", "should have" and "I would have" done this, that or the other. But bottom line folks "I" and "You" were not there. I went through that crap so much in the military after an operation, well you should have done this or gone there, or been able to overcome that obstruction. Yeah (insert officer rank of choice here) Asshole Sir and if a frog had wings he wouldn't bump his butt! Sir! If coulda, shoulda, wouldas counted for real we would all be PowerBall winners and no one would ever be hurt in any way. Just my two cents worth.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Enjoy your L2 sounds like the flight was entertaining, but well within the parameters of a safe flight.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
He flew and recovered. Technically it qualifies.
Randy http://vernarockets.com /
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@charter.net wrote:

Thank you Randy, and others. Several other rockets had similar turns in their flights. I assume it was a gust of wind. No one even mentioned it at the time. It only became an issue when someone who was not there, and who hates the hobby and everyone in it, made it an issue.
Jim
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

a gust of wind. No one even

That's what Dale was asking about and a logical conclusion. Sounds like the wind was not in your favor. Any idea on what the wind speed was at the time of launch?
Congrats! If it was me, I'd take it.
Bear Bryant: "There's no such thing as an ugly win."
; )
Randy http://vernarockets.com /
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
From this I am ASSUMING (yes I said it!) that winds aloft even 100 ft up were much different than surface winds. From flying enough in South Dakota winds aloft are much different than surface winds. When I certified L2 surface winds about 5 kts. my AMRAAM 3 on a J350 went up 5345' AGL it drifted on it's chute approximately 5 miles. Suburban recovery and my daughters peregrine eyballs found it in perfect shape. I had increased to the next size larger chute that day as the ground was typically gumbo concrete up on the bluff and did not want a prang for the cert flight. I was instructed to go down to a 24" chute to reduce drift, by a person that suposidly would know better. Later this same person reduced thir chute size as mine drifted away and he broke 2 G10 fins on contact with the prairie. Ground based weather observations (winds, temps, clouds, precips) are just that and do not always determine weather aloft. Just ask a Cessna pilot that ices up at 8000 MSL when surface temps are 50 degrees F.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Okay so I put a buck and a quarter into the pot on this one Congrats aagain Jim.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
We got a flight of a j350 for a L2 cert which DID NOT FLY AS DESIGNED (a weather cock at 100 feet)! (a L2 SHOULD have a feel for how a bird will perform given the weather and winds!)
This bird with this motor should have been in the range of "1000's of feet" in altitude....
What if the bird had gotten hung up on the pad and only made it to 100' and then popped the chute and landed next to the pad? It's the same as this flight. Would that be a a valid cert?
This clearly wasn't a valid cert, and all the folks that claim it is, clearly have never really read or understood the cert requirements. A PML Endeavor on a J350 at 100-200 feet that weathercocks?
I'm dumbfounded at the number of posts from those who think is was a good cert! Maybe that's why the NAR BOT has his new thing about range safety.. Too many weird flights.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
AZ Woody wrote:

The vast majority of high power rockets I've seen either did, or could have, weathercocked depending on the conditions. That doesn't make them unsafe.

Who said it didn't? The original post doesn't mention the maximum altitude. 100 feet was the approximate altitude at which the rocket began to weathercock. Are you so quick to jump to conclusions that you missed this fact and assumed that the rocket never cleared 100 feet?

No, it is not the same, since there is no reason to believe that this flight only made it to 100 feet. Perhaps you should pay a little more attention to what you read and be a little less quick to jump on people.

Well Woody, I'm dumbfounded that a seemingly bright guy like you can't read well enough to know that "the rocket weathercocked at 100 feet" does not mean "the rocket only made it to 100 feet".
I would think that with your experience, you'd also realize that any J-powered rocket that only made it to 100 feet would have impacted long before the ejection charge fired. Even if the rocket somehow made a 90 degree turn and went horizontal, it still would have hit the ground before popping the chute. In fact, Jim's original post states that after apogee the rocket went "down and down and down". That sure doesn't sound like a rocket that went horizontal or that only made it to 100 feet.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Amen Ray,
Incidentally, I reported witnessing a FatBoy with an E9-4 yank a launch rod off a multiple pad. Went up about 100', turned 90 degrees and the rod fell off. The model streaked off and I could appreciate the ballistic drop as it travelled horizontally. The ejection fired about 40' off the ground, chute deployed and model recovered unharmed. Man did some rmr people rant about this one. This was at my first TRA event run by some very qualified individuals with five flight lines Estes up front and one M pad "way out there". So a launch rod got loose. Sure you don't want to see that happen but this sport cannot be totally risk free. The rod was replaced and secured and there were no other launch mishaps. In fact I can't recall witnessing a recovery system failure. If this was my model on a cert flight and it behaved like the above, (would have to different model of course) I would offer to reload and do it again. This would be unlikely to happen 'cause I'd probably use a rail and a heavier pad. :)
Kurt Savegnago
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

I don't know, Ray - this sounds just like the AZWoody I've read here on RMR for the past six years or so...
A complete and total perfect idiot who is more than happy to jump headlong toward the first conclusion that graces his pea brain.
Do you have friends, Woody? I'm wondering who would choose to hang around with a downer like you.
Jim, Congrats on the cert. Don't listen to Woody. He's just a pant-load.
Pathetic.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@gtlakes.com wrote:

Hmmmmmm.
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.