Fins can be smaller with each the aerodynamic cone. Leave off the lug, launch from between a few skewers in the dirt.Or leave off the cone...
Fins can be smaller with each the aerodynamic cone. Leave off the lug, launch from between a few skewers in the dirt.
Max casing with paper cone glued on tip, fins and lug glued on sides.
Incongruent: it is a violation of our model rocket safety code to Glue anything to any model rocket motor. it is considered altering the intended use of the manufacturer.
there are any number of ways to work around actually glueing or otherwise attaching things to our motors.
Safety First Always.
Incongruent: it is a violation of our model rocket safety code to Glue anything to any model rocket motor. it is considered altering the intended use of the manufacturer.
there are any number of ways to work around actually glueing or otherwise attaching things to our motors.
Safety First Always.
Not sure about that. Think they call it EX. There's a post here somewhere where someone did exactly that. It was quite impressive.
Dick: I realize you fly with MDRA which is a much looser flying group the the NAR.I'm not sure that is true always. NAR ruled that thrust rings can be bonded on.
Dick: I realize you fly with MDRA which is a much looser flying group the the NAR.
That Said: We're not talking about a thrust ring.. The young man was talking about glueing on the Nosecone and fins directly to the motor casing... That Sir is a NO NO direct violation of our Safety code. While it may be an NAR Safety Code we are talking about LPR actually Micro BP motor and as stated in the earlier post it is a violation of that safety code to attach or add ANYTHING to a Model Rocket motor casing.
IT is not safe, it is not smart and it also makes the rocket a Throw-Away one time rocket which is another safety code violation. As our Rockets are intended to be flown, Recovered and flown again.
Lets not confuse people with the somewhat Cowboy additudes of the HPR -Tripoli crowd.
This has Nothing to do with EX which is yet another Fringe faction of our hobby which is Much more regluated than we are and I for one would like to keep it that way.
Hopping off my broken soap box.
Unless it's an FSI Mach Buster.Incongruent: it is a violation of our model rocket safety code to Glue anything to any model rocket motor. it is considered altering the intended use of the manufacturer.
there are any number of ways to work around actually glueing or otherwise attaching things to our motors.
Safety First Always.
Unless it's an FSI Mach Buster.
Tony: There are NO exceptions to the model rocket safety code Period. Further there is absolutely no reason to do such an unsafe act.
As mentioned earlier there are many ways to accomplish the same thing without violating the code. One simply has to think outside the box but stay within the rules of our Safety Code. This Code is why we are able to fly model rockets without a lot of government regulations and restrictions. It as been in existance since the very begining of the hobby and why we can still say we are the #1 safest outdoor sport or hobby on the planet. Lets keep it that way.
Let me sight an example from the mid 1970's:
Many of the then active BTC's in NAR competition wanted to get a wavier on the ruling about attaching or altering any model rocket motor. Many (Myself included) wanted to drill a 1/16" or smaller hole about 1/8" below the forward end of the empty cardboard motor casing to allow the inserting of a music wire motor retention wire extending through the model body & motor casing making a light weight positive motor retention method.
This requrest was soundly denied by the NAR safety committee, sighting the NO attachment or Alteration of any model rocket motor beyond the manufacturers initial intended use. We argued that these two small holes in the empty casing section of the motor would in no way alter the performance or "Intended use" of the motor by the manufacture. This was also rejected as both motor manufactures at the time Estes and Centuri would not sign off the the suggestion.
While those small holes seemed to everyone involved to NOT alter the motor in any real way, The powers that be stressed: If the motor manufacturer's wanted a hole drill or punched in any part of their motor casings they would have to be done in the manufacturing process not as an after thougth by the hobbiest.
Our best thoughts & theories will never cover the unintended consequences as completely or accurately as the manufactueres risk assessments.
Tony: There are NO exceptions to the model rocket safety code Period. Further there is absolutely no reason to do such an unsafe act.
As mentioned earlier there are many ways to accomplish the same thing without violating the code. One simply has to think outside the box but stay within the rules of our Safety Code. This Code is why we are able to fly model rockets without a lot of government regulations and restrictions. It as been in existance since the very begining of the hobby and why we can still say we are the #1 safest outdoor sport or hobby on the planet. Lets keep it that way.
Let me sight an example from the mid 1970's:
Many of the then active BTC's in NAR competition wanted to get a wavier on the ruling about attaching or altering any model rocket motor. Many (Myself included) wanted to drill a 1/16" or smaller hole about 1/8" below the forward end of the empty cardboard motor casing to allow the inserting of a music wire motor retention wire extending through the model body & motor casing making a light weight positive motor retention method.
This requrest was soundly denied by the NAR safety committee, sighting the NO attachment or Alteration of any model rocket motor beyond the manufacturers initial intended use. We argued that these two small holes in the empty casing section of the motor would in no way alter the performance or "Intended use" of the motor by the manufacture. This was also rejected as both motor manufactures at the time Estes and Centuri would not sign off the the suggestion.
While those small holes seemed to everyone involved to NOT alter the motor in any real way, The powers that be stressed: If the motor manufacturer's wanted a hole drill or punched in any part of their motor casings they would have to be done in the manufacturing process not as an after thougth by the hobbiest.
Our best thoughts & theories will never cover the unintended consequences as completely or accurately as the manufactueres risk assessments.
My point was that FSI intended the motor to have fins attached to it.
My beginning post was referring to the smallest possible rocket using the MMX engines, not the necessarily smallest legal one. The reduction in diameter contributed to it being the smallest. I was under the impression that the OP was asking a theoretical question rather than a practical one, but I could very likely be wrong.
I was taking it as theoretical too.
My point was that FSI intended the motor to have fins attached to it.
My beginning post was referring to the smallest possible rocket using the MMX engines, not the necessarily smallest legal one. The reduction in diameter contributed to it being the smallest. I was under the impression that the OP was asking a theoretical question rather than a practical one, but I could very likely be wrong.
Dick:
Since we have used "Friction Fitted" motors from the very beginning of the hobby. Which entails wrapping masking tape around the motor casting. The next logical step was creating an aft Thrust ring using built up wraps of masking tape to help retain the motor(s). With all that History, I'm sure the Safety committee looked at allowing the bonding of a extra section of body tube or whatever as an "Aft Thrust Ring" as being equal in not altering the intended use of the motor by the manufacturer to the tape Friction Fit and/or tape wrapped aft ring. Thus approved the use of thurst rings being glue or bonded to the aft end of our motors.
This is the ONLY "alteration of any kind allowed to a model rocket motor I've ever heard of being approved by the NAR Safety committee.
You have to remember it's dangerous to glue your nose cone onto a MM motor. But it is very possible to launch your HP rocket with a 16lb bowling ball for a nose cone and have it comply with the safety codes. Gosh, I hope the person who gets hit by the MM motor falling out of the air doesn't get smashed into the ground.
The NAR safety code is vague in certain spots, for instance tampering with a motor or using them for any purpose except those recommended by the manufacturer, what exactly does tampering mean? If you use a nose cone to widen the top of a D12-0 booster motor to CHAD stage an 18mm motor, is that tampering? If you mark or scratch the paper when you insert it into a rocket with an engine hook, did you tamper with it? And using it for a purpose other than reccomended by the manufacturer, Estes "reccomends" that you use their motors in their kits and specifically theirs so that they can make more money. Same thing in with their kits, but when you used a quest motor in an Estes kit or an Estes motor in a quest kit, did you violate the NAR safety code?
Enter your email address to join: