Payload

I have a question about payload and balance. If I were to add payload to one side of a rocket, such as a camera, would I need to add counter weight to the other side of the rocket to insure a straight flight path? I am thinking of building a rocket to take videos with. Specifically using the GoPro Hero4 Session. according to their website it weights 2.6oz (74g) and is basically a 1.5" cube. My plan is to buy the Estes Big Daddy (but open to suggestions) and mounting it in the nose cone.

There are a lot of threads on this same rocket and topic.

https://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?130943-Big-Daddy-nosecone-Mod-question

https://www.rocketryforum.com/showthr...Dart!&p=736301

https://www.rocketryforum.com/showthr...addy+Nose+Cone

https://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?118211-big-daddy-recovery-problems&highlight=Big+Daddy+Nose+Cone

Apparently there is a lot of lawn darting on this specific rocket, and I don't know if a payload in the nosecone would help? Maybe someone who has done this will pitch in.

The short answer is that you'll probably be ok with putting a session in the nose cone, and you won't need to worry too much about balancing the off center weight, but you'd need to use a motor with a little more thrust than the average Estes black powder D or E.

I get the appeal of the Big Daddy for the project- it's got a lot of room in the 4" diameter for stuff, but being a squat rocket it has challenges with stability.

Something like the Ventris that's taller and even has a payload section that will fit the session, might be more suitable- https://www.estesrockets.com/rockets/pro-series/009701-ventris-ps-rocket

kj

Are you putting it in the nose cone looking sideways, or are you going to mount this eccentrically hanging off the side? If it is in the nose cone looking sideways, I doubt the off center position of the mass will make much difference, and likely more than matched but the added stability you get from the significantly increased mass you are putting forward of the CG. Anyway, if it is IN the nose cone facing sideways, ignore the rest of this post.

On the other hand, if you are putting it on eccentrically so the lens "looks back" at the pad in launch position.......

My gut tells me you are better off putting it on a long skinny rocket than a fat rocket.
Reason: both mass and drag.

The wider the rockets, the greater the distance off center your added mass and added drag are. Therefore the greater the "moment" to pull your rocket off the straight and true optimal flight path.

From a stability perspective, assuming you are placing the camera forward of the CG, the MASS of the camera actually increases the stability of the rocket.

Looks kinda chunky, any kind of "cowling" that might cut back on some drag would be useful.

I don't think eccentric mass will be an issue, but the skinnier the rocket, the less of an issue it will be.

The eccentric drag may be more of an issue. Again, still less of an issue with a skinnier rocket.

Also, an overall larger rocket (not necessarily diameter, but overall more mass and more engine power) is less likely to get torqued off flight path.

Since the camera is relatively expensive (I'm a Low Power Rocketry guy, so anything over $10 is expensive, this camera prices out at $200 on Amazon) may want to fly a "mock" version before committing. Take your planned lift vehicle, tape a cube about same size and weight on it where you plan to put the camera, use the same engine you plan to use for the flight, launch it as a "heads up" flight, and make sure the flight profile is good before actually sticking this puppy on the rocket.