1. Home
  2. Model rockets forum
  3. re-hash: was diffculty of a modelers manned space program? - PAGING BOB COX

re-hash: was diffculty of a modelers manned space program? - PAGING BOB COX

just an FYI

I bought a house with suitable land for building a rocket shop capable of building full scale redstones, although i probably will be starting with the smaller joes as I've stated before. hence the reason you guys have not seen me ranting here much since july.

yes i've been busy, clearing yards overgrown with 3 ft tall weeds tends to kill off free time for rocketry, and now with the arctic winds blowing, i finally have time to start unpacking all the stuff that was in the house i rented and start putting into some type of order.

house was an old farmhouse. old barn foundation still exists, but unsuitable for rocket shed, but maybe a good spot for a large engine test stand.

oh PAGING MR COX. he's been there, and he's afarid, ask him

*******************************************

ok, I think I mentioned this before, but my brain is re-hashing it again.

one of our club members asked if we could do a manned rocket program. I of course could not find any reason to think it impossible, hence it is possible.

ok, so our club could repeat NASAs early space program, I mean we got a

30 year advance in technology from what they did, and I think I found enough manuals to give us an idea of what we need here

formatting link

Mercury Familiarization Manual Dec 20 1962 Mercury Familiarization Manual May 1962) Mercury Maintenance Manual 1959 Mercury Tracking Sites

with this, we should be able to start making mockups and designing what

equipment is needed and where to put it. hopefully this will get us a capsule lighter than the original (remember we got composites, they didn't)

also, as moderls go, we build a small rocket then upscale it. so we start with the redstone. Hmmmm, a little to much to chew in one bite, so we'll try the little joe (never said it would go suborbital it's first flights) and try a 2 stage unit later.

build a scrawny model outa BT-80 with a 8 engine cluster, 4 13mm, 4

18mm. Yikes its CG is waaaay aft. put more noseweight in. then more. then more.

this is where our club is right now. got one club member staring at a couple of quilly's jpegs of the capsule and a pile of cardboard, and me with a bt80 model that is too tail heavy.

In the future we plan on a 1/18th scale model (action figure size) and then a 1/6 model (G I Joe size) and then 1/2 and finally full. Yes I know there is a guy building a GI Joe rocket. we'll be keeping tabs on him :)

comments? where did I cross the line into madness? wanna get on the waiting list for a ride?

Reply to
Tater
Loading thread data ...

Thanks for dragging me into this, Tater. ;-)

Yes, I have visited stately Tater manor and toured the future site of the Dairyland Spaceport Vehicle Assembly Building. When Tater starts talking about his R.U.F.N. ("Are You F***ing Nuts?") manned flight project, I just smile and nod and inch my way toward the door.

-- Bob Cox

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Tater wrote:

Reply to
Bob Cox

It *does* seem to be a bit of a stretch... to go from the type of rocketry WE do, to a manned program. (Even a suborbital one.)

But then - I can't help but wonder how many people in the EAA, who build and fly their own aircraft, started out as R/C modellers.

Don't forget that it's the Dreamers that pave the way for the rest of us. :-)

Reply to
Len Lekx

not much, when you look at the size of a full scale mercury little joe compared to some of the HPR rockets around.

without the escape tower, mercury little joe was as tall as that one rocket the wildman flew, and the upscale mars lander and outlander are about about the same diameter

Reply to
Tater

having witnesses testify tends to support us nutjobs :)

Stately? while not a white trash trailer house, i wouldn't call it stately.

hmmmmm DSVAB just doesn't sound catchy enough.

hey, I did catch myself when i started rambling on about that.......

Reply to
Tater

Not if you are Steve Bennett. ;-)

Reply to
Darrell D. Mobley

He hasn't *gotten* there yet, has he...? ;-)

I haven't heard any stories about Bennet and his Thunderbird series of rockets lately - is he still working on it...?

Reply to
Len Lekx

Oh yeah:

formatting link

Reply to
Darrell D. Mobley

and in classic RMR fasion, I'll divert the thread by saying this.

I prefer thunderbird 2, even if thunderbird 3 is easier scratchbuild

Reply to
Tater

And I'll continue the deflection by saying...

I actually prefer Thunderbird 5. A REAL orbiting platform. :-)

Reply to
Len Lekx

Useless without a means to get there - I vote Thunderbird 3, even if it is easier to scratch build.

Reply to
Darren J Longhorn

SWMBO commented that I should make interchangeable pods to put on my F-150 so I could have one for rockets, one for home improvement stuff, one for skiing, one etc etc etc....

"oh, you mean like thunderbird 2?"

"????"

so now i am off to ebay to get the megaset, as i no longer have cable.

Reply to
Tater

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.