Brett Buck wrote in news:bpb5p5$ snipped-for-privacy@cui1.lmms.lmco.com:
AP = ammonium perchlorate. We know that AP in certain particle sizes is potentially explosive. APCP = ammonium perchlorate composite propellant. We all await the demonstration of sport rocketry APCP being made to explode "at least in the layman's sense of the word".
len.
And they do it without helmets, can you imagine? Maybe they also need rib protectors, and knee supports, why stop there, why not padded skivvies? I've never been to a log rolling event, but I can see from the video of one they need all this. Are the spectators equipped to stop a flying razor sharp cleat should one fly into the crowd? I believe the crowd should be behind plexiglas, maybe even lexan.....and they should all wear safety glasses.
Overkill. When the pendulum swings way too far in one direction.
Doug Sams wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@flash.net:
Yeah. 20 gallons of gasoline is the same threat as few hundred gallons of boron trifloride or anhydrous ammonia.
len.
C'mon, Len,
My point is that Steve Kroft is hardly an expert on anything (other than stirring the stink and scaring the public), but stuff like this only serves to promote the idea that "government intervention/ regulation/control is required", and when that occurs, 100 things can happen, and 99 of them are bad!
Doug
Yes. But HOW it was done is the problem and I was right there telling them the alternative when they wrote and passed this crap.
That is bullshit. Model rocketry has an aeromodel exemption in 48 states (thanks Estes) and CA and MA have entire codes devoted to MR, or did. CA still does.
The HOW was largely orchestrated by Dane Boles, the biggest HPR hater on the planet, and his constituency include(d) Mary Roberts, Bill Stine and a couple of others.
Nope. I was there in the huddle on game day. No MMQ for me!!
Jerry
You were not.
Those formulas use very small minimum and average PARTICLE SIZES AND ADDITIVES THAT FURTHER SENSITIZE IT. ALSO FAR LOWER BINDER PERCENTAGES THAN WE USE. YET THEY ARE STILL EXEMPT UNDER 27 CFR555.141-A-8. HPR POPELLANTS ARE BENIGN AND SAFE BY COMPARISON AND IF THEY PASS THE SERIES
1 TESTS THEN BY TEST THEY CANNOT EXPLODE.CAPS off.
Jerry
Yes they do.
No they don't.
And I have already proven both positions in writing with actual cites. The fact you refuse to recognize actual fact when stuck in front of your nose is NOT MY FAULT.
To follow their positions in the suit in practice till the suit is settled since the ATF cannot enforce a law that does not exist.
And I have already said this in writing with actual cites. The fact you refuse to recognize actual fact when stuck in front of your nose is NOT MY FAULT.
Jerry
If it is so simple, post a sample test methodology in detail.
From your response, I presume that have no measurements of the thrust misalignment of MR and/or HPR motors, nor a procedure for computing or determining a positive flexural gain margin or 15 degree flexural phase margin.
FWIIW, static margin and damping ratio are good "figures of merit" for transient response. If you are starting to study launch transients and dispersions, you will find the concept of wavelength of yaw to much more useful than frequency.
Alan
Did he ever return?
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Still would puncture. I can't think of anything short of a heavy kevlar weave (aka bullet proof vest material) that might withstand HPR impacts. If the supporting structure was rigid enough.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
It's interesting to note how many people have been killed or seriously injured by model planes and copters, and all the possible way such accidents can occur. Certainly makes HPR's safety record look pretty good by comparison.
By "static margin" I assume that you refer to cp-cg distance. If so, the problem with this is while it gives you some idea of the restoring torque, the torque alone doesn't really tell you much about the transient response. You have to have the inertia in there, too - thus the natural frequency (sqrt(K/I), where K is the ratio of angle to torque). Perfect examples of static margin not giving you the entire answer - superroc might have a foot between the CG and CP, but it has dreadfully slow transient response. It's not just the damping, although thats high, too - the inertia is pretty high. And something like a Big Daddy, short and stubby, that has excellent transient response, but has minimal "static margin".
If you are talking rigid body gain margin as "static margin" - all that necesarily means is that it's stable - not that it's stable and has a rapid response. In fact, for a rigid body system, stability and bandwidth tend to be opposing forces.
Brett
No, and his fate is still unlearned.
am I the only one who got this?
He may try forever just to get his LEUP, 'Till then his AP'll remain unburned.
Zooty
Sleep deprivation is an ugly thing....
So true.....it's interesting the RC chopper accident which started the thread was not a result of RC choppers being banned during sunny days. That accident showed there's safety in numbers (he was alone) , environmental factors (regardless of design strenth/flex/stability) are anavoidable, unexpected problems will and do occur, you can't legislate every damn little detail just because, He could have stayed home and had a beer, he chose to engage in what has the possibility of being an inherently dangerous hobby.......they still fly on sunny days! Common sense prevailed.
Well, at least Dave and I did! I'll bet Len did too.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
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.