Possible Hybrid Idea?

It could be done, but you'll likely need another gas or pressurization system to deliver the GOX, and LOX is better anyway. The idea of NOX is that jit sufficently self pressurizing to simplify the support equipment.

Alan

Alan Jones wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

If EJN is referring to those BernZ O Matic O2 tanks,their volume would not be sufficient for your purposes.Rather expensive,too.

GOX suffers from low density and a large change in supply pressure as you drain the tank. The tank is therefore very heavy with respect to the available impulse and establishing a nearly constant mass flow rate becomes problematic for a lightweight design.

Brad Hitch

I posted thermodynamic properties for the vapor dome of N2O once, if that helps:

Brad Hitch

This is a bit old, doesn't have the current post-fire and CAD/USD price changes. But it gives the point on break even being 2-4 flights with an M. When flying a J or K, the payback is a bit further out, but an 'I' can be flown twice on the same grain so under $20 per.

Having only flown Hypertek, I was interested in the RATT testing and watched a few burn in the desert heat. Very cool burn and the howl at the end is just bizarre! I don't know when they're planning to release the new models, but I for one will be watching for them.

Joel. phx

Yeah, until they regulate it out from under us.

I want to qualify my statement so as not to discourage any prospective new hybrid flyers.

My perspective on costs is based upon my personal flying preferences. If I had money to burn (sic), I would simply fly more model and large model rockets. HPR fascinates me and I am (still) working on a L1 project, but whenever I get some free time I find myself playing around with the little guys. That said, a hybrid/GSE/electronics initial investment is simply "relatively" expensive. $200.00 of model parts is much more appealing to me than it would be to someone more involved in HPR.

Anyone interested in HPR should certainly consider the lower per-flight

costs and lack of regulatory hassle as major incentives. The requirement for electronic deployment is, I believe, a "bonus" in the long run as it encourages additional technological involvement; a fundamental benefit of sport rocketry. As an ex-electronics tech and an avid shooter/reloader, I am already comfortable with electronic recovery requirements.

So, I did not mean to imply that hybrids are "too expensive". They are just relatively expensive compared with my primary interests.

Your position is among the largest masses of rocket consumers, by far.

Point. Sometimes a "cheap per flight" is more than offset by "interaction" (labor) and hardware (GSE). Hybrids seem to have a break point at J and above.

Jerry

To quote Mark Bundick, "Thank you for your input."

Jerry

P.S. I hope so!!

Add those USR flights to your flight log on your site :)

Jerry

But RMS is 3-4x as labor intensive as USR R&R reloads, so the conditions are stacked.

I can see the sunk cost arguement. Therefore you have a "marginal cost" perspective, that a new and capital starved person might not.

Jerry