It's official, Pee-Wee Payload is Now a Provisional NAR event!

[Micromeister]

Just got word from the NAR Contest board chair that Pee-Wee Payload has been included with 4 other new events in the 2010-2012 Provisional Events cycle to be voted on by the contest board in 2012 for inculsion in the Pink book (US Model rocket Sporting Code).

I'd sure like to hear/see some of you maxers flying 1/8A Payload altitude at your club launches and report back to the nar.
Just holler if ya need any help with prototype model plans or how to's on producing the T2 x 70mm 3.5g payloads. I'm happy to helps.
also have prototype plan and models for 1/4A and 1/2A models if interested.

Edit:
might as well upload the pdf drawing.

[MarkII]

So what are the actual rules for Pee Wee payload?

MarkII

[kjohnson]

Modify Rule 25, Payload Altitude, creating a new standard 3.5 gram Pee Wee
payload that can be used for 1/8A, 1/4A, and 1/2A engine classes. The current
NAR standard payload remains for engine classes A and up.

The Pee-Wee NAR model rocket payload for use in 1/8A, 1/4A & 1/2A motor classes models is a non-metallic cylinder containing fine sand and epoxy mixture with a mass of no less then 3.5 grams. This cylinder shall be 6.2 +/- 0.5 millimeters in diameter, and 70.0 +/- 10.0 millimeters in length. The payload may be permanently sealed to prevent the loss of the sand. No holes may be drilled into it, no changes made in it’s shape, and no other material may be affixed to it.

Add the following classes:
Motor class Payloads Carried Weighting factor:
1/8A - 1 Pee-wee - 17
1/4A - 2 Pee-wee - 16
1/2A - 3 Pee-wee - 15

Add the following:

Tracking suggestions for Pee-wee payload competitions:
It is suggested to improve visual tracking and altitude tracking data closure rates that the base line for Pee-wee payload events be shortened to 100meters, placing the stations centerline a maximum of 60 meters from the launch range.

[Micromeister]

As Designed
1/8A Models would carry one 3.5g load
1/4A Models carry 2- 3.5g payloads
and 1/2A Models boost 3- 3.5g Payloads.

[jadebox]

It is suggested to improve visual tracking and altitude tracking data closure rates that the base line for Pee-wee payload events be shortened to 100 meters, placing the stations centerline a maximum of 60 meters from the launch range.

For the MMX launches, someone could stand next to the pads with a yard stick :-)

Seriously, though, this sounds like a really neat contest. I think it's also a good "entry level" contest for introducing clubs and individuals to contests. It should be easy for a club to set up and judge and inexpensive and easy for contestants to get started.

-- Roger

[Micromeister]

As with many folks, I believe you'll be quite pleasantly surprized by the altitudes obtained with the new 3.5g payload in T2+ minimum diameter Micro models.
My original thought was to create a 1/4oz or 7gram payload for Micro's and did the early test flights with such a payload. On MMX-II we were averaging 35-40 feet. That'd be a very long yard stick;)

Yeap I think 1/8A PeeWee Payload Altitude competition will be great fun, I'm hoping to see and hear lots of flight reports here this flying season. Hope your Club will be one.



Ps: If you need any helps with producing T2(.246") x 70mm payloads I have a pictorial I can send you. just ping me at my normal e-mail
mrcluster@yahoo.com

[kullas]

I think im getting confused which is not to hard :) MMX is 1/8A?

[Micromeister]

Yes
MMX-II motors are listed as Quest #5663, NAR listed as 1/8A.5-1
MMX-I motors are " #5662, NAR listed as 1/8A.2-1
MMX-II-NE Boosters listed as Quest #5665, NAR listed as 1/8A.5-1 NE (no ejection).

[sandman]

Yes
MMX-II motors are listed as Quest #5663, NAR listed as 1/8A.5-1
MMX-I motors are " #5662, NAR listed as 1/8A.2-1
MMX-II-NE Boosters listed as Quest #5665, NAR listed as 1/8A.5-1 NE (no ejection).

John, can I enter my MMX Astron Constellation?:D

It's the one all the way on the right. It just happens to be right next to a "normal" (BT-50 sized) version.

[Micromeister]

John, can I enter my MMX Astron Constellation?:D

It's the one all the way on the right. It just happens to be right next to a "normal" (BT-50 sized) version.

As long as the New Standard Pee-Wee Payload 6.3mm (.246") dia. x 70mm long (2.75") can be fitting into the payload section and retained there the entire flight you could. I know my T4 (.448" dia.) micro Constellation payload bay isn't long enough, I sort of doubt yours will be either..Sorry;)

[kullas]

so for a 1/8a with the 3.5g what would be a good height for these to go. i plugged my little pay loader i just built into rocksim and its showing 150' so im guessing 100'?

[Micromeister]

I really don't want to speculate on what we'll actually end up with as far as tracked altitudes go.
I'm sure a "standard materials" type minimum diameter model (like the prototype perviously pictured can achive 100-150 feet fairly easily. using BTC methods and materials.....We'll the 1/8A Altitude records for single and 2 motor cluster/ alt are both 82meters or 269feet Limited by the Ejection delay NOT the thrust;)

I'd like to tell you I have some Flight data to share but the weathers been so bad locally, I've only been able to fly a few of these minimum dia prototype models in the park across the street without the aid of trackers. all 4 models were lost in the woods but the flight was pretty well "UP There" LOL!
I'm praying for decent weather for our March sport launch to get a couple more flights in with test easy to see type models. It's been a long flightless winter.

[kullas]

We has some good weather today and i took the opportunity to go out and fire off some mmx in my front yard. the payloader i built was the first to fly i loaded it with the payload and hit the fire button off she went it hit about 140 to 150 ft and was still going up at a good rate of speed when the ejection went. it came down nose first with the streamer in tow. it stuck in the soft ground. I tryed it again and another repeat of the first flight
I got in the house and put it on the scale it comes in at 6.5g with the spent engine case. im going to play around with rocksim and see if there is any changes i can make to it to make it better.
Next weekend i hope to have some better data on the height i will get my brother to help me track it

[MarkII]

That's a pretty respectable altitude for Micromaxx, with or without a payload. Given the exceedingly brief delay in the motor, I wonder whether the payload competition altitudes will be appreciably different than the typical altitudes of non-payload rockets.

MarkII

[kullas]

Like i say i hope to have some better data next weekend my altitude is based on the trees in my front yard the tallest one is about 85 90 ft and it was well over it.

[Micromeister]

Chris your right in the window I expected for rod launched flights. I am assuming you were not flying off a piston? I'm of the opinion our competition altitudes will top out right around the same as 1/8A Alt. Somewhere between 240 to 260feet.

Mark it is the ejection that is limiting compeitition altitudes as it is. Our current MMX-II 1/8A.5-1 motors with and average .857 second delay is simply Way to short for many of the better designs. 6.5grams is a great coasting mass for minimum diameter micros. right in the optimum range I usually shoot for 6.6 to 6.8 depending on design. Oh what I've give for a 2 or 3 second avg delay micro motor.

[kullas]

I stayed up late last night messing around with the design of the rocket. and from what i was seeing yesterday Rocksim was comming close wo what i was seeing in the actual rocket. it predicted 150ft and it came close. after tweeking my design RS is telling me 181ft thats what a 20% increase in altitude thats off a rod. I have never messed around with a piston launch. is that like a silo launch or is it different. Mmmm a challange i love it

RS is telling me that opt. delay is 2.5 sec. I wonder if Quest would be willing to help us out with that? or maybe toss the idea around maybe a 2 sec delay would be great

[Micromeister]

First I wouldn't put much faith in the RS sims without deducing a minimum of 10%.

As for longer delays.... We've been talking with Quest for several years about longer delays. Actually since about 60 days after MMX intro release in 1999. What we've recieved is MMX-II motors with a high impulse be SHORTER delay and a no ejection delayed booster. While I'm tickled pink with all three motors. it seems longer delays are more of a Sizing problem.
I wouldn't get my hopes up on any longer delay train anytime soon. tho it would sure be nice.

Bill If your out there lurking: As you can see for the comments here and our many previous conversations and examples shown.... we really could use a 2 or even 3 second delay for "BASIC" micro construction models, even longer for the highly competitive stuff;)

[MarkII]

Longer-longer delay Micromaxx motors would require the creation of a new case dimension "standard" for 6mm. Can you imagine the howling that would result from that?

Kind of like producing a "long" 24mm motor. Or one that was midway in size between 18mm and 24mm. Rocketeers everywhere would be throwing themselves onto the ground, rending their garments in distress, and asking the heavens, "why, why...?"

MarkII

[Micromeister]

Longer-longer delay Micromaxx motors would require the creation of a new case dimension "standard" for 6mm. Can you imagine the howling that would result from that?

Kind of like producing a "long" 24mm motor. Or one that was midway in size between 18mm and 24mm. Rocketeers everywhere would be throwing themselves onto the ground, rending their garments in distress, and asking the heavens, "why, why...?"

MarkII

Actually Mark I doubt there would be much of a backlash at all. Since we don't "Normally" use motor hooks and other retainers anyway a longer motor could just be allowed to extend further from the rear of most current models (no it wouldn't adversely affect most flights). While new construction could either remove any motor block completely or move it further forward as is done often to accomidate E9 24mm motors when a model is mostly flown on D12's with a spacer.
I for one have already had this very conversation with Bill Stine several times. Really it has to do more with revenue and construction....If we had the numbers flying standard 13-24mm motors it wouldn't be much of a problem but with a couple million motors setting in stock...it's a big investment to add another of any kind. If we want more choices in motor delays we're going to have to get more people flying Micros on a much more frequent basis...We're working on it, but we aren't even close yet;)

[kullas]

Im doing my part i just ordered some :)

I have a question about piston launchers. How do they work? i have looked at pics of them and for the life of me i cant figure them out any help or web sites that describe how they work?

[Micromeister]

While this subject is WAY OFF Topic I'll answer it anyway:

Piston Launchers help the motor actually use the very first combustion products produced at ignition, rather then wasting them simply as exhaust.

They work by pressurizing the inside of a semi-sealed tube encompassing the motor.

The Easiest, Cheapest, and least efficent form is simple a hardwood dowel, expended motor casing as the head, a length of bodytube that fits the motor and a coupling or motor block. the dowel stick is somehow attached to the launcher base or supported with the model motor friction fitting into the sliding motor tube over the dowel top mounting (glued) motor casing. with the short coupling or block glued in the aft end that stops the slide tube when it hits the expended motor casing.

Next set up it replacing the spent motor casing with a brass or stainless metal head. these are called Metal Head Pistons. still a 0-volumn piston but a little better friction wise.

Next up is the floating head piston which is more then a single step up but much more complex to have work consistantly.

The Photos below are just to give you a sample of how they can appear. If interested I have building pictorials for both 0-volumn metal heads and micro floating head pistons I've been using for a long while now.

[MarkII]

Actually I agree with you, John. I was just being a bit sarcastic. I'm with you on wishing for longer-delay Micromaxx IIs. And I also realize why Bill is reluctant to sink money into another variety. At least right now. He's already got several things in the pipeline that he is trying to move to market.

But he should know that the interest is there for them.

MarkII

[Micromeister]

I'm pretty sure he knows, I'm just not sure if there is anything he can or more importantly wants to do about it.... At least for the foreseeable future.
I wish he frequented this forum more frequently. I believe he visits now and then but not to often.

For Sure folks! KEEP bringing up longer delayed MMX motors every time you place an order with Quest or who ever you buy Micro Maxx motors from. The more we fly the more they'll make and the more we ask about things the more likely they are to sometime come to pass....3 years ago I didn't think we'ed have a Booster motor for about 10 years;)

More over if we don't buy the motors being offered...the less likely the manufacturer will be to Re-order or increase availability. Design & Build those boosted multi-stagers and clustered models.....

[rokitflite]

I'm pretty sure that once the TON of existing Micro Maxx motors sells down to a level that allows a reorder to be even half a consideration, more variations will most certainly be considered.

[Micromeister]

I'm pretty sure that once the TON of existing Micro Maxx motors sells down to a level that allows a reorder to be even half a consideration, more variations will most certainly be considered.

Good to hear!
Would you also...sort of occasionally remind him...softly.. I know if we hammer to hard he gets resistant;)

[rokitflite]

Good to hear!
Would you also...sort of occasionally remind him...softly.. I know if we hammer to hard he gets resistant;)

I didn't remind softly... I actually asked directly last week and got an answer similar to what I posted. So I think it will happen, more of the old stock needs to be bought up first though.

[MarkII]

I didn't remind softly... I actually asked directly last week and got an answer similar to what I posted. So I think it will happen, more of the old stock needs to be bought up first though.OK, everyone, listen up: clusters only from now on!

MarkII

[Micromeister]

OK, everyone, listen up: clusters only from now on!

MarkII

10-4 Cap'in! full speed ahead! Clusters UP!

[kullas]

10-4 Cap'in! full speed ahead! Clusters UP!

LoL thats sounds like a charlie foxtrot

[ScrapDaddy]

AIM!! LAUNCH!!! (my Rocket CATO's):D

[ScrapDaddy]

AIM!! LAUNCH!!! (my Rocket CATO's):D


10-4 Cap'in! full speed ahead! Clusters UP!

That what i was referring to BTW

[kullas]

If this weather clears out this weekend I hope to get some flights in. I have my brother and my wife for trackers. I also have my new prototype ready to fly. It weighs almost 2 grams lighter. granted im launching of a rod so im not going to hit extreme altitudes but should give mt a base line for making them better

[ScrapDaddy]

have you tried using a piston launcher with MMX's yet?

[Micromeister]

Yes:
For quite some time now LOL!!!

[Micromeister]

Was a very Busy Sport Launch Last weekend, with a fun contest, TARC flights and a ton of Scouts out sport flying. but I did manage to launch all three motor class PeeWee Payload models once during the day with the Help of the Better 2/3rds.

Have to say these first Rod launched flights were a bit surprising. The first launched was on an OLD OOP 1/4A3-3T Apogee motor with 2 3.5g loads. the model seemed to struggle off the pad only getting maybe 45feet. I'm thinking it either hung on the rod a bit or it was a weak motor.

Launching the 14mm 1/2A3-4T with 3- 3.5g loads Wow! out of sight high. in fact since the streamer failed to fully deploy I didn't even see the model until it was about 30feet from the ground. One of the other flyers said he believed the model was well over 350-400 feet up at ejection.

I was impressed with the speed and altitude of the 1/8A PeeWee with a single 3.5g load flying on a mmx-II motor. flown from a tower (lugless) she easily hit the 150-175ft level.

leasons learned, I need to attach the streamers closer to the ejecting back end of the model rather then the nose area of the shockcord.
Pics still in the camera, I'll see what if anything I caught in the next day or two.

[Peartree]

leasons learned, I need to attach the streamers closer to the ejecting back end of the model rather then the nose area of the shockcord.


Why?

I would think if you placed them too far back you would develop new problems a) deployment would take bit longer which would be bad for a duration event and b) if the ejection was weak (does that happen in MMX motors?) the streamer might not deploy at all.

This isn't based on knowledge or experience with MMX, just trying to think things through and understand.

[kullas]

its for altitude not duration if in thinking right. I have found that i stuff the shock cord into the payload section and stuff the teflon streamer into the bottom section on top of the motor. it blows it every time. im going to a launch this weekend so i should have a good chance to have some people help me track the altitude. the weather has been crazy if im working it is great out and if im off it rains or the wind is blowing way to hard to launch

[Micromeister]

its for altitude not duration if in thinking right. I have found that i stuff the shock cord into the payload section and stuff the teflon streamer into the bottom section on top of the motor. it blows it every time. im going to a launch this weekend so i should have a good chance to have some people help me track the altitude. the weather has been crazy if im working it is great out and if im off it rains or the wind is blowing way to hard to launch

Correct:
On two of the the 3 models with the Streamers installed in the body above the break, the streamers were not dragged completely out of the body at ejection, I think the aft section had to much time to slow down before hitting the end of the shockline.
Yes putting the stream in the aft section does make it automatic but I'm trying to make these base models "qualifiers" that anyone can build and fly. For most people its almost automatic to loading the streamer in the body, just trying to make the base design simple. I'm sure my own competition models will like have the streamers located in the aft coupler.