#31
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
My sources say discussions have already happened, maybe check your notes? |
#32
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#33
|
||||
|
||||
If I see the person this year I’ll ask if they or you is fibbing.
|
#34
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Literally nobody cares. Money talks BS walks. (Alexander Andrake) |
#35
|
||||
|
||||
Jerry what is the average and peak thrust, and what is the weight before and after burn? For me for R/C rocket gliders those are all critical numbers.
|
#36
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I have contacted the AMA so it is not your responsibility to get it approved for field use. it is mine. There are a bunch more AMA members than NAR members. Jerry |
#37
|
||||
|
||||
Do you have a thrust curve or can you answer the question on the initial thrust?
I still need the before and after weights as well. 8ns probably won't work for my larger gliders, as they need more like 12 for the weight once off the rail for a while at least for altitude, I'm guessing they're going to weigh a lot more than 2 oz which is too heavy for my smaller designs. |
#38
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I would give you links but al my websites are down right now. Maybe look at wayback machine v-serv.com/usr G008 and H25 to begin with. You have not specified if you need an initial thrust slug. I am kinda curious what plane folks would prefer. An AT 29mm 80F10 for example has about 2 pounds for 0.5-1.0 seconds with its RAT core. A G008 has an offset moon so the initial slug is closer to 1.5 seconds. The motors I actually have in the longer burn are not for rockets or airplanes and have no initial thrust slug. This would be a modification. Jerry |
#39
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
New motor technology is certainly a good thing, and I'm all for it... If you're going to limit the discussion to HPR/HPR+ (whatever HPR+ is; obviously over the established "regs" defining HPR?) then I'm not interested, because I have ZERO interest in HPR... HPR is just high powered expense. Most of the HPR people I've seen just do HPR to brag on how much money they've blown on their "projects" and most of their "projects" are just super-sized, super-expensive versions of LPR/MPR stuff anyway, little more than a grander more expensive version of the "whoosh,pop" of an Alpha III... sure they incorporate some added technology like dual deploy and such, but usually to little/no purpose... then you have general @ss-grabbery like "bowling ball lofting" and other such STUPIDITY that just sours me on the whole thing... Most HPR stuff I've been around have DEFINITELY given me the "hold my beer and watch this" vibe which is why I won't allow HPR on my farms we lend to clubs as ranges... Later! OL J R
__________________
The X-87B Cruise Basselope-- THE Ultimate Weapon in the arsenal of Homeland Security and only $52 million per round! |
#40
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
EXACTLY!!! Another GREAT reason I have ZERO interest in HPR... I'm NOT jumping through some stupid hoops to get "certifications" for a FRIGGIN' HOBBY, a LEISURE activity!! We have WAY too much "regulation" and stupidity as it is, without some self-appointed stuffed shirts creating all these "hoops" for us to jump through for their own amusement. In the case of HPR, it's particularly galling, because I'm old enough to remember when ALL these current HPR honchos were "outlaws" flagrantly violating the previously "established" rules governing and limiting the size, weight, impulse, and propellant amount limitations that then governed "model rocketry"... until they gained sufficient following to "get the rules changed" and the "then model rocket honchos" of the time realized if they didn't embrace the change they'd be relegated to irrelevancy... SO they finally embraced it and created "legal" HPR... then the very outlaws that had flouted all the previously existing regulations set about creating their entirely new set of regulations to "govern" HPR and creating all these stupid certification nonsense hoops to jump through... the very height of hypocrisy!!! Jerry, if you have some tech you want to sell and it passes muster with the GUBBAMINT so it's not being shipped illegally and putting truckers or shippers at undue risk, or violating other GUBBAMINT LAWS that would put you or your customers IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW, then I'd say go for it and screw the self-appointed "rocketry popes" in NAR and TRA and all their self-made hoops... Personally I could care less if a motor is "currently certified" by NAR or TRA or within their "limitations" or whatever... most of what they do is irrelevant anyway... Not like plenty of motors have been sold with NAR/TRA certification "blessings" on them that were KNOWN "hand grenades" that blew up when launched, or didn't deploy the parachute, or otherwise didn't work "as advertised". Or, the fact that many motor designations are deliberately misleading, and the orgs "certify" them that way anyway simply for marketing ploys. The height of arrogance to me is the @ss-backwards "decertification" system that instantly 'decertifies' a motor basically at their whim when it's no longer "generally available", like the gazillion of them out there are good one moment and magically "bad" the next simply because they're no longer being produced in mass quantities... OH, but *IF* you genuflect at the altar and do your paperwork and get a papal indulgence, you CAN fly these magically decerted motors "legally" in the "old motor test program" or whatever... It's all a bunch of self-serving nonsense and stupidity. Rule-making for rule-making's sake, worst aspects of the nanny-state at play, but it makes the stuffed shirts feel important, so we'll go with that! LOL Like the most egregious garbage we're seeing in all this pandemic response... Later! OL J R
__________________
The X-87B Cruise Basselope-- THE Ultimate Weapon in the arsenal of Homeland Security and only $52 million per round! |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|