Sneak Peak: Jolly Logic's Easy Dual Deployment

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I think one aspect of this product that people will love is the user interface. I'm hoping it will seem quite natural and that you will hardly notice it. ... That's the full user interface guide right there. No jumpers or flashing codes or interface programs to learn. Thoughts?

ChuteReleaseRendering-189x300.png

Makes sense to keep it simple and the associated cost affordable.

I would go for simple and cost effective. If I want data I can always add in an Altimeter 1, 2, or three.


+1. It is perfect just as it is. Simple, elegant, and fully functional. Clearly a lot of thought went into its design, and it will fill a HUGE need in the gap between Estes-type apogee drift and full-fledged dual deploy. I have added (several of) them to my Christmas list.

Sather

:cheers:
 
+1. It is perfect just as it is. Simple, elegant, and fully functional. Clearly a lot of thought went into its design, and it will fill a HUGE need in the gap between Estes-type apogee drift and full-fledged dual deploy. I have added (several of) them to my Christmas list.

Sather

:cheers:

Another +1. Would love to have one or more for next flying season (which comes after hockey season...)

Chris
 
Crops are coming out now. My season is about to get started within the next week or so. I need (OK... "really, really want") one of these now or sooner ....which ever comes first. :drool:
 
Please, take my money!!! *LOL* :D I will be GREATLY interested in obtaining one (or more) of these when they become available!
 
I agree 100%. I'm haven't been this excited about a rocket product in quite a while.
 
I think adding an option to see max altitude should be on future versions. I'm with Al on that topic. If I really want to know max altitude I will put an additional altimeter in the rocket. Let's just get this little guy out in the wild to work out the kinks and then we can start putting frills on it. :D

I think this product really has it's place especially with TARC teams or USLI teams. No pyro means anyone can prep it. I like that.

Also I saw a comment earlier about what if the target altitude is never obtained? That's simple, if the software detects decent below target then open that chute up. I cannot think of a situation where I wouldn't want the chute open. Say if a fin comes off and it goes unstable or a motor misbehaves and under delivers on thrust, etc.

And I'd like to comment on cable cutters...The Archetype cutter is great BUT in order to get it to work the rocket has to have an e-bay which is properly vented and wires running outside of that e-bay to the reefed chute with a small pyro charge. But this product is great because I can employ it in already built simple single deploy rockets without adding an e-bay.
 
And I'd like to comment on cable cutters...The Archetype cutter is great BUT in order to get it to work the rocket has to have an e-bay which is properly vented and wires running outside of that e-bay to the reefed chute with a small pyro charge. But this product is great because I can employ it in already built simple single deploy rockets without adding an e-bay.

+1. I have used a combo of cutters and releases over the years. The biggest risk always arises from the need to have the device connected to the av-bay. That physical connection and/or wiring and potential tangling of such is the #1 failure mode.
 
Soooooooooooooo................ Got in late on the thread. Looks like motor ejection at or about apogee and then mini-solenoid cable release at deployment altitude. That's going to be a nice seller and service to the hobby.

Even if the motor delay is a little too long, the fact that the chute remains in the chute protector would allow for a bit extra margin of error to avoid a zipper. Of course folks if the stupidheads among us (myself included) screw up the ejection
charge in an RMS motor we'll be in hot water no matter what.

I want one or two to convert some smaller fliers to "no muss, no fuss" dual deployers!!! Kurt Savegnago
 
I posted earlier the results of two flights to 600-ish feet, with releases at 200 feet.

Today I decided it was time to get up there a little higher, so we loaded a G77-7R and flew to 1375 feet, again set for release at 200 feet.

1WAqXGI


Before flight, I painted the rocket Day-Glo orange to make it easier to find. But it ended up not being necessary, as even though it was a little windier today once again the rocket landed pretty close (perhaps 100 feet away).
My chute pack this time looked like the below, a simple burrito wrap.

I have decided that it is *much* more important to worry about getting your chute out than it is to worry about having it already mostly open when Chute Release lets go. In my launches over the past two days, the chute unrolls and opens pretty quickly, even wrapped up like this.

As I mentioned earlier, the LEDs look ghastly bright here, but they won't when they are shining through the black injection molded cases.

Here's the AltimeterThree data of the important part of the flight:


1MLb5wK


This time it's nice to see that the rate slows from about 27 fps to 17 fps right at 200 feet, though you can see that it takes a 2 or 3 seconds to calm down and for the shocks and swinging to settle out.

My video was spoiled by the fact that I put a Macro instead of the Telephoto lens on my phone. So everything looks far away, and you can *barely* see the moment of release. Sigh. Might be time to get a real video recorder with a good zoom on it. One of our testers just bought such a unit, so hopefully we'll have some more professional video to share soon.

But I'm pretty happy with how it's flying right now!

More to come.
 
Awesome! Has it been tested with the chute wrapped up in nomex, burrito style?

Nate
 
I'll do that next time.

Me suspects the best situation is to wrap the the whole arrangement with the chute release device around the parachute already by the nomex protector. You wrap the device around the outside of the chute protector, the chute might work
free or the deployment will take a bit longer with the nomex having to come off the chute.

I say that because stupidhead here forgot to attach the apogee shockcord to a 4" diameter cardboard DD rocket with a 38mm J510 for power. A camera resided on the lower end (booster) as I was rushed to get the launch done.

Well, rocket is launched, apogee charge blows and the rocket heads down to terra firma nose down with the camera looking up at the sky. The shockcord is seen streaming by with the open quicklink and the drogue wrapped in a piece of nomex. The nomex/chute assembly is flopping around in the breeze for a heck of a long time. I mean a REALLY long time, before the 18" drogue worked free. That provided enough drag so the booster flipped over so the camera now showed the ground view. The butt end if the rocket was pretty strong so when it hit, there was a crinkle in the mid-section of the bodytube I straightened out and did a .7oz fiberglass cloth trick to bring back to flight status.

The errant upper bay with the main chute? I don't have any idea of what happened there. That thing should have nosedived towards the ground and when the main blew, should of zippered to death. Frame by frame analysis after the rocket body flopped down and showed the ground, showed some random frames of the main chute open on that main bay, lower to the booster and it just about beat the booster to the ground. The booster won. The upper main parachute bay survived without a scratch. These are simply 4" LOC tubes. No re-enforcing whatsoever. I can't figure out how the upper bay deployed without wrecking anything. There wasn't an imprint of the shockcord on the open lip of the main chute tube. Nothing to suggest even the start of a zipper. Weird. The rocket will fly again.

The lesson here is wrap the release around the whole shebang and when it releases, there is likely going to be more time before the chute opens. If one tightly reefs the chute with the chute release device and wraps it with a chute protector that's threaded on the shockcord, the chute/release assembly will likely be free of the chute protector long before the chute release occurs. No protector to interfere with the chute opening.

The only reason to wrap a parachute with nomex and then wrap a cutting device around it is to protect the chute from the escaping burning powder from a pyrotechnic cutter. That's all.

Since there are no pyrotechnics involved with the Easy Dual Deployment, the chute ONLY needs to be protected from the motor ejection charge gases. Once it's out in the breeze, there is no more need for the nomex and the chute will more expediently inflate once the device releases it.

John. Don't bother testing it with wrapping the whole shebang. It will only lead to delay of full inflation and might lead to streamering. Reserve a couple for me to purchase. Kurt Savegnago
 
Last edited:
Here's why I want this:

I'm a BAR, flying a few times a year in sites of various sizes. Some of them are wide open (but you have to find the rocket), some of them are kinda small. I would like to go to dual deploy setups to make it easier to keep rockets on the field. On the other hand, I already have enough hazardous crap in my basement (including the motors) that I don't want to add black powder to the mix. Rocketry shares my small 1-car basement garage with a car. This kind of unit means that I can do dual deploy with no black powder.

Plus, I don't have any DD infrastructure yet. A cable cutter rig plus a DD altimeter is getting pretty close to a hectobuck. If I can be less than that cost on a system that takes less storage space and no additional hazmat, I'm really happy.
 
I think one of the KEY features is that it isn't designed for 1 specific rocket.
Meaning, unlike DD rockets and many times over the expense of electronics and such.
You simply move from one rocket to the next, as far as I can tell so far.
For me, that would be one awesome bit of equipment I would put my hard earned bottle deposit money into!
Rock on Jolly Logic!
 
Ok, so the ejection pressure spike will be ignored...that's neat, most of my rockets are not set up for dual deploy but could benefit from a reefing scheme...

Frank
 
In case you might not have used dual deployment before, or might be interested in the relative value of delayed parachute opening on the flight profile, I've run some simulations our website to include some flight simulations. They show the impact that Chute Release can have on the distance you'll need to walk, and I ran them under two different wind conditions (slightly breezy 8-15 MPH and breezy 15-25 MPH).

You can also see the technique of I've modeled the descent with Chute Release for simulated flights.

Check it out here.
 
Here's a video (just a minute and a half) that shows one way to prep your chute and apply Chute Release. It includes the time it takes to tether Chute Release and perform a ground test.

FYI, this is a high-quality 30" Fruity Chute that normally would be about twice the chute needed for this rocket (Estes Leviathan), which comes with a 24" chute with a not-as-good drag coefficient. While the stock chute was landing at 15-17 fps previously, this chute sets it down gently at 10 fps. And that's the ideal: your rocket drops from the clouds, the chute pops open, and it settles gently.

[video=youtube;G9jlOs5R13g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9jlOs5R13g[/video]
 
I really like the idea behind this device, but I'm not sure I fully understand how properly use it.

Perhaps an example might help. I have a single deploy 2.6" FG Honest John rocket that uses 29mm motors (~2.5 Lbs liftoff wgt). Right now I use a 24" X-Type chute deployed at apogee - motor ejection.

Now if I'm following the use concept correctly, using this device would allow me to use the motor ejection charge to deploy the "chute package" [held from actually deploying until it reached the preset lower altitude], AND also use a larger chute that would slow the descent rate more than the 24" chute such that the down range landing distance is reduced to something much less than what would it typically be with a standard deploy at apogee launch.

Does that about cover it?
 
I really like the idea behind this device, but I'm not sure I fully understand how properly use it.

Perhaps an example might help. I have a single deploy 2.6" FG Honest John rocket that uses 29mm motors (~2.5 Lbs liftoff wgt). Right now I use a 24" X-Type chute deployed at apogee - motor ejection.

Now if I'm following the use concept correctly, using this device would allow me to use the motor ejection charge to deploy the "chute package" [held from actually deploying until it reached the preset lower altitude], AND also use a larger chute that would slow the descent rate more than the 24" chute such that the down range landing distance is reduced to something much less than what would it typically be with a standard deploy at apogee launch.

Does that about cover it?

Yep, that's it exactly.

And hopefully be able to reduce the risk of loss from a long drift.
 
Holee molee,

I've had a revelation. I have two ASP WAC's with 38mm motor mounts, one yellow, one white: https://www.asp-rocketry.com/ecomme...m-Version-.cfm?item_id=631&parent=8&navPanel= that use a MAD unit for apogee deployment. Goes pretty high on an Ex ~H160. Man with a chute release riding along aft, I can get a perfectly timed apogee deployment from the MAD unit
and a lower level main chute "unfurling". Or I can continue taking long walks. Neato! No wonder I want at least two. Kurt Savegnago
 
Yep, that's it exactly. And hopefully be able to reduce the risk of loss from a long drift.
Sign me up! I want a couple to start ... I have a launch on Oct 17th with a couple H motors - where's the order form? :eyepop:

If you already have a price point perhaps you could setup your website to take pre-orders. ;)
 
Last edited:
I really like the idea behind this device, but I'm not sure I fully understand how properly use it.

Perhaps an example might help. I have a single deploy 2.6" FG Honest John rocket that uses 29mm motors (~2.5 Lbs liftoff wgt). Right now I use a 24" X-Type chute deployed at apogee - motor ejection.

Now if I'm following the use concept correctly, using this device would allow me to use the motor ejection charge to deploy the "chute package" [held from actually deploying until it reached the preset lower altitude], AND also use a larger chute that would slow the descent rate more than the 24" chute such that the down range landing distance is reduced to something much less than what would it typically be with a standard deploy at apogee launch.

Does that about cover it?

Don't forget the vent hole for the device to work correctly.
 
Back
Top