The Rocketry Forum 2.0 (Different Ownership)

Hello, I welcome any who are interested in a web based forum to look at TRF

2.0 It is NOT moderated in the same way as the original TRF. You can visit the site at:

Introduction:

formatting link
right to the forums:
formatting link
If you've been frustrated or upset by what you've seen, or may have encountered with regards to moderation on the old TRF then the new site might be for you. DanC TRF 2.0 Admin

Reply to
user
Loading thread data ...

So how is it any different from rmr?

Using virtually the same name as TRF is pretty sleazy. It's not that hard to come up with an original name.

=D1

Reply to
raydunakin

The Rocketry Astrodome???

David Erbas-White

Reply to
David Erbas-White

I hate ruining an attempt at humor. That was supposed to be "Superdome"...

David Erbas-White

Reply to
David Erbas-White

Reply to
Dan Cox

Then why not delete it and try again?

Chuck

Reply to
Chuck Rudy

Yeah, my father did that to me and it's nothing but headaches. His mail comes here and viseversa, what's wrong with that guy? ;-)

Chuck Jr.

Reply to
Chuck Rudy

Tell that to the guy over here who came up with a company called Tripoli UK Rocketry Ltd, a rocket group called OKRA (i guess to confuse people with UKRA) and a launch event called HIRW (at a similar time to the very popular IRW event)

Reply to
Damian Burrin

I fed your post through my truthifying anti-obfuscation de-spinnerizer, which restores text back to the author's original meaning and intent:

Reply to
Frank N. Stein

Got a spare transmorgafier on you?

Randy

formatting link

Reply to
<randyolb

Different name.

To a degree.

Different mission.

To a degree.

Since people have to SEEK OUT the "new" site, it will be interesting indeed a year from now which one prevails in the court of public opinion.

Maybe they can weed out and shed light on geniuses like this:

"Pat's own mixtures.. a P motor is going to take a little time to get up even with Thermite."

-David Wilkins (ROL chat) at 7:12 PM EST

Or not!

formatting link
Oh, wait. That was a Q :)

Tech post Jerry

formatting link

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

What's tech about that? You can hardly read it and it has no supporting documentation of specifics.

Please provide supporting documentation.

Reply to
Phil Stein

Rise time 0.20 sec.

How long did the "P" take to "light" on the P with airstart project?

Please provide supporting documentation.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

What kind of igniter was used?

Reply to
raydunakin

Supporting documentation for what? I'm not claiming to have made a P or a Q. If this is indeed a tech post, I and everyone else should be able to learn something from it. Do you want to prove that you are a technical leader or just do what everyone expects you to do? This is your big chance.

Reply to
Phil Stein

Fetch.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

A single, lightly dipped ematch.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

What jerry means is, "all the documentation i got is that dorky gif.".

Reply to
Dave Grayvis

Interesting. What is it that makes the motor light and come up to pressure so quickly?

=EF

Reply to
raydunakin

The graph jerry has does not show igniter ignition, if You look closely, You will see that the graph starts out with the thrust at 1000. So, what You are seeing is rise time from a 1000 to just under 4000 in what looks to Me to be about 0.25 seconds, not 0.20.

Reply to
Dave Grayvis

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.