What's new in rocketry electronics?

Hi all, I've been away from the hobby for the last couple years. What's new in rocketry electronics?

Just to list one at each end of the price range...

https://www.multitronix.com/

https://eggtimerrocketry.com/

StratologgerCF, RRC2, RRC3, bigredbee just to name a few.

timbucktoo said:

StratologgerCF, RRC2, RRC3, bigredbee just to name a few.

Click to expand...

And the Missleworks RTx...on my radar

Altus Metrum products. Telemetrum, TeleMega...

Wow, that Eggtimer Quark looks like a good deal. And I thought the Adept 22 was cheap. How's the performance on the Quark? and how long has Eggtimer been around?

Check out the updated Marsa54L, and the associated MarsaNet products. Good stuff.

Worsaer said:

Check out the updated Marsa54L, and the associated MarsaNet products. Good stuff.

Click to expand...

I new of the Marsa54 when I was last involved with the hobby, I always felt it would be nice if they'd implement the lcd and push buttons as a separate plug in module. How is the 54L different from the 54?

The integration of MarsaNet modules, wireless pyro functionality, etc. My explanations won't do it justice. Check it out.

Not sure how broadly you want to define 'rocketry electronics', but the proliferation of onboard video cameras probably deserves a mention. This is due to the cameras getting smaller and cheaper, and also the marketing of easy-to-mount, 3D printed camera mounting shrouds. Fun!

Strattologger CF is small footprint but is also a logging altimeter with an aggressive price for an off the shelf solution.

EGGfinder and the almost here Missilleworks RTx are affordable GPS trackers with no notebook or ham radio required.

Its a good time to fly high !

Kenny

RadManCF said:

Wow, that Eggtimer Quark looks like a good deal. And I thought the Adept 22 was cheap. How's the performance on the Quark? and how long has Eggtimer been around?

Click to expand...

You have to build the Quark. Outside of that, good Rf resistance at least with testing on the ground. A 2 watt dog tracker took out two Adept 22's and resulted in this:

https://tripolipeoria95.com/uploads/OMG5.jpg

Eggtimer has been around I believe more than two years. Kurt

Worsaer said:

The integration of MarsaNet modules, wireless pyro functionality, etc. My explanations won't do it justice. Check it out.

Click to expand...

That MarsaNet system is interesting, it would be nice to see a telemetry module for the 70cm band though. I've never been particularly enamored by the use of the ISM and other license free bands. Too many limitations, and not enough room for experimenting.

ksaves2 said:

You have to build the Quark. Outside of that, good Rf resistance at least with testing on the ground. A 2 watt dog tracker took out two Adept 22's and resulted in this:

https://tripolipeoria95.com/uploads/OMG5.jpg

Eggtimer has been around I believe more than two years. Kurt

Click to expand...

Ouch!
So, by "RF resistance" I assume you mean resistant to RF interference? There's another term in radio, "Radiation Resistance" that comes up in antenna performance, and your wording struck me as ambiguous.
I like that all their products are kits, I like working with electronics. I'll have to order a few...

RadManCF said:

Ouch!
So, by "RF resistance" I assume you mean resistant to RF interference? There's another term in radio, "Radiation Resistance" that comes up in antenna performance, and your wording struck me as ambiguous.
I like that all their products are kits, I like working with electronics. I'll have to order a few...

Click to expand...

Yes,

Touching the opto-isolator chip with a handi-talkie antenna and blasting it with 5 watts of Rf energy. Only succeeded in changing the tone of the beeping. Putting the H/T next to the Quark in ready mode did nothing to it.
Specifically, no resets or spurious popping of the ematches. Resistance to stray Rf interference is the term I guess I should have used.
If one encloses their tracking device entirely in their rocket, antenna included, is a different issue. Can be done but the bay needs to be radio-lucent. Kurt

Kurt

RadManCF said:

That MarsaNet system is interesting, it would be nice to see a telemetry module for the 70cm band though. I've never been particularly enamored by the use of the ISM and other license free bands. Too many limitations, and not enough room for experimenting.

Click to expand...

What do you want to do on 70cm that can't be done on 900Mhz?

All kinds of things. Homebrewed transmitters, Amateur television, transmission at power levels greater than what part 15 allows, the chance to use radio spectrum that isn't used by everyone and their brother, the list goes on and on...
Also, since I hold the highest level of Ham license, I might as well use it...

ksaves2 said:

Yes,

Touching the opto-isolator chip with a handi-talkie antenna and blasting it with 5 watts of Rf energy. Only succeeded in changing the tone of the beeping. Putting the H/T next to the Quark in ready mode did nothing to it.
Specifically, no resets or spurious popping of the ematches. Resistance to stray Rf interference is the term I guess I should have used.
If one encloses their tracking device entirely in their rocket, antenna included, is a different issue. Can be done but the bay needs to be radio-lucent. Kurt

Kurt

Click to expand...

What frequencies did you conduct that test at? Did you take note of the wire lengths in that setup?

RadManCF said:

All kinds of things. Homebrewed transmitters, Amateur television, transmission at power levels greater than what part 15 allows, the chance to use radio spectrum that isn't used by everyone and their brother, the list goes on and on...
Also, since I hold the highest level of Ham license, I might as well use it...

Click to expand...

900 Mhz is shared spectrum with Amateur radio. You can do all those things there, and antenna's are smaller....

N2AFU (also Extra Class.....)

jderimig said:

900 Mhz is shared spectrum with Amateur radio. You can do all those things there, and antenna's are smaller....

N2AFU (also Extra Class.....)

Click to expand...

Amateur radio is also a secondary user there, and the primary users are much more numerous, and all over the place. The primary user of 70 cm transmits from a small number of sites on the coasts, and their transmissions are directed out to sea. Interference to and from that system is considerably less likely than interference to or from other 900Mhz users. The smaller antennas are nice in some respects, but fabricating them would be tricky, as the shorter wavelengths demand tighter tolerances. I don't think 70cm antennas are particularly unmanageable, either. 900Mhz is also into the microwave region, and building microwave equipment is a somewhat different beast from working with lower frequency equipment. In particular, high power gets expensive much faster at higher frequencies. It can also cause injury at lower power. Long story short, there's more elbow room, and it's a bad place to put a death ray. Another issue I have is that I think it's cool taking technologies developed by another group of hobbyists, and putting them to good use. As a result, I'm biased toward RDF and APRS based systems. All that said, I do think it could be interesting to fly a MESH node as a telemetry system, It would be incredibly heavy, but you could put a bunch of ethernet devices in the rocket...

So, do you do any radio for its own sake?

RadManCF said:

So, do you do any radio for its own sake?

Click to expand...

Absolutely!

Interference. Part 18 devices are primary, amateurs are secondary. Part 18 devices radiate only and it would be almost impossible for an amateur device to interfere with one even if one was close by which is unlikely. Part 15 devices must not interfere with primary or secondary users. In other words Part 15 devices have no standing with regards to amateur use, they must not interfere with us, we can stomp on them all day as far as the FCC rules go.


Incidentally it has been my experience at large launches (LDRS, Red Glare, MWP, NYPOWER etc) you will find 70cm WAY more congested than 900 Mhz. Maybe that will narrow in the future as 900 mhz system grow in popularity but with the standard protocol for 900 mhz being hopping spread-spectrum and carrier sense collision avoidance that band can support an order of magnitude more users per spectrum slice than 70cm.

You are correct, 900mhz is not particularly suited for home brew radios, 70cm is not that easy either. 900mhz homebrew is integrating existing commercial modules, life is too short to make you own 900mhz radios. (Same can be argued for 70cm as well....) Most of the experimentation in that band that is feasible for amateurs is in the area of excitation and data encoding. That's my interest currently, how to get as much information communicated error free with the smallest bandwidth.

I've only been at launches here in MN, mostly with MASA, where most folks aren't very electronically inclined, and almost no one is using electronics of any kind. When you say 70cm is more crowded, are you talking about crowded with rocketry users in that immediate area, or is that a general statement on the band's usage? With regards to the regulatory issues you mentioned, yes, that's how it's supposed to work, but is that how it does work? Just because somebody's part 15 device is supposed to accept interference doesn't mean they're going to be happy about it. At the same time, I think it's wishful thinking to assume that no devices operated under part 15 will interfere with part 97 devices. With the amount of consumer grade devices coming from China, it's become quite common. Also, since the off the shelf 900Mhz systems that have become available seem to be aimed at people who do not wish to obtain an amateur license, do these systems have a means of transmitting a callsign along with the GPS data? I would think that if they are not transmitting a callsign, then they would not be considered to be operating in the amateur service, and therefore not subject to protection under part 97.
Anyway, my main interest in radio is antenna construction, portable HF operation, and hardware integration. The latter is also my favorite part of rocketry, getting all the different parts to work together. I'm not much of a ragchewer, but I do find contesting to be fun, and a good test of a station.

RadManCF said:

I've only been at launches here in MN, mostly with MASA, where most folks aren't very electronically inclined, and almost no one is using electronics of any kind. When you say 70cm is more crowded, are you talking about crowded with rocketry users in that immediate area, or is that a general statement on the band's usage?

Click to expand...

Rocketry use.

RadManCF said:

What frequencies did you conduct that test at? Did you take note of the wire lengths in that setup?

Click to expand...

70cm, 150mhz (MURS dog tracker frequencies) and 2 meters. Wire length? Heck I had the antenna right next to Quark right out in the open.

It was a down and dirty test to assess any gross incompatibility. I'd still recommend using contained bare ematches in the rocket and testing by turning everything on and letting the rocket sit outside for 30 to 60 minutes...........

Unless one already "knows" the devices being used play well together. For instance, the Raven flies fine with a low powered 70cm Beeline GPS sitting next to it. I and others have done that a lot. Ask Greg Clark (he makes and sells them)

Johns Marsa 54 (in its various iterations) I hear is a very robust device.
Kurt

ksaves2 said:

70cm, 150mhz (MURS dog tracker frequencies) and 2 meters. Wire length? Heck I had the antenna right next to Quark right out in the open.

It was a down and dirty test to assess any gross incompatibility. I'd still recommend using contained bare ematches in the rocket and testing by turning everything on and letting the rocket sit outside for 30 to 60 minutes...........

Unless one already "knows" the devices being used play well together. For instance, the Raven flies fine with a low powered 70cm Beeline GPS sitting next to it. I and others have done that a lot. Ask Greg Clark (he makes and sells them)

Johns Marsa 54 (in its various iterations) I hear is a very robust device.
Kurt

Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing. I asked about wire length because wires that are any multiple of 1/4L are likely to start acting as an antenna. I've got a pair of Adept 22s, but I've never done such a test with either of them.

RadManCF said:

Thanks for sharing. I asked about wire length because wires that are any multiple of 1/4L are likely to start acting as an antenna. I've got a pair of Adept 22s, but I've never done such a test with either of them.

Click to expand...

Yes that's very true about the wires. Other thing I've heard is a poor ground plane on the altimeter in question. I have a couple of Adept 22's but I am using them for lower fliers I don't need Rf trackers on since my friend had that experience posted above. The kicker here is that he built the rocket anew and was going to fly it in the same configuration.:jaw: But he was going to put 3 feet between the dog tracker and the two
"new" Adept 22's. I had a fit :shock: and ragged his butt to do an all up ground test with bare ematches. Wasn't intending to do any testing. Nonetheless, he went ahead, tested and after several minutes both altimeters reset and shutdown. Soooooooooo, he used different altimeters that tolerated the 2 watt dog tracker just fine. Wished I could say there was a happy ending but there wasn't..... Motor case failed aft just off the rail and the rocket tipped over on the ground. Some burning grains plopped out and consumed the rocket. Was a 6 inch diameter motor.

I've had folks reply that the Adepts do fine with other low powered trackers. I'd still test anyways. I do range checks on everything now as I was bit with that too. Kurt

2 watts is a fair amount of power, compared to other trackers. If I remember right the basic version of the BRB RF beacon only puts out 50 miliwatts. I've never actually used a tracker and an altimeter in a rocket simultaneously. The year I got my tracker, the weather was so uncooperative, that I only got one chance to fly it. That flight turned into quite a farce. Long story short, I lost the tracker, but had no trouble finding the rocket. That was embarrassing.

The BRB standard is something around 15mW. There is a 150mW RDF tracker and a 70cm GPS tracker that is 100mW if the HP option is ordered.
Also has a 2M 5 watt tracker that I believe has adjustable output. Kurt

ksaves2 said:

The BRB standard is something around 15mW. There is a 150mW RDF tracker and a 70cm GPS tracker that is 100mW if the HP option is ordered.
Also has a 2M 5 watt tracker that I believe has adjustable output. Kurt

Click to expand...

Ah, thanks.