Help Support RocketryForum by donating using the link above or becoming a Supporting Member.


Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7
Results 181 to 209 of 209
  1. #181
    Join Date
    22nd January 2009
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    2,062
    Quote Originally Posted by ksaves2 View Post
    Question about over the "horizon" relay. Does that need an end-user interaction like setting a parameter or is it completely transparent? I know this sounds callous but if one is only interested in "their" rocket and no one else's, are they going to see
    everyone else's Featherweight GPS on their receive end that may very well be "beeping" away their respective locations from the prep area at a large launch? This is somewhat "mootish" if the device saves the positions onboard for later download and use but some of the selfish paranoids out there might not want to "share". Shame on them!! Kurt
    The plan is for it to be transparent. About a half second every transmit cycle is dedicated to having the tracker listen for "lost" trackers and for the ground stations to communicate with other other ground stations what channel it's using. This will happen in the background and won't interfere with one user's tracking of his own rocket.

    If you want to see what other Featherweight trackers are operating in the vicinity, you can pull that up on a separate page. This and the public information features will be in future releases, so some details are still to be worked out. We could provide an option for a user to opt out of having his own rocket transmit on the lost rocket channel, but in general I won't want to add options willy-nilly because it complicates the user interface. Also, rocketry is fun, and people at rocket launches, with few exceptions, are all on the same "team". So I'd actually rather not have the user interface in effect ask all the users if they want to be distrustful of their rocketry neighbors, even if a few distrustful users really want that feature.

    Adrian Adamson
    Featherweight Altimeters LLC
    www.featherweightaltimeters.com

  2. #182
    Join Date
    22nd January 2009
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    2,062
    Quote Originally Posted by GrouchoDuke View Post
    Adrian- Do you have a plan for when it'll be blessed by the TRA record committee?
    Once we get the first production build done and the first run shipping, then the data logging is one of the first advanced features I plan to implement. I figure I need to have it implemented before asking Tripoli for their blessing on it. I'd like to have that done this winter/spring, so I can go for a record or two at the 2018 LDRS in May. Maybe I should sponsor a contest like I did at the Kloudbuster's LDRS a few years back.

    Adrian Adamson
    Featherweight Altimeters LLC
    www.featherweightaltimeters.com

  3. #183
    Join Date
    18th October 2016
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian A View Post
    Once we get the first production build done and the first run shipping, then the data logging is one of the first advanced features I plan to implement. I figure I need to have it implemented before asking Tripoli for their blessing on it. I'd like to have that done this winter/spring, so I can go for a record or two at the 2018 LDRS in May. Maybe I should sponsor a contest like I did at the Kloudbuster's LDRS a few years back.
    Great, thanks for the info. That helps a lot. I'm hoping to go for a couple records in May also - sounds like the timing could work out nicely.
    TRA L2. I-class record: "Vanish 29" with an I224, 14,596ft, Mach 1.92. Video here.

  4. #184
    Join Date
    26th November 2009
    Posts
    4,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian A View Post
    The plan is for it to be transparent. About a half second every transmit cycle is dedicated to having the tracker listen for "lost" trackers and for the ground stations to communicate with other other ground stations what channel it's using. This will happen in the background and won't interfere with one user's tracking of his own rocket.

    If you want to see what other Featherweight trackers are operating in the vicinity, you can pull that up on a separate page. This and the public information features will be in future releases, so some details are still to be worked out. We could provide an option for a user to opt out of having his own rocket transmit on the lost rocket channel, but in general I won't want to add options willy-nilly because it complicates the user interface. Also, rocketry is fun, and people at rocket launches, with few exceptions, are all on the same "team". So I'd actually rather not have the user interface in effect ask all the users if they want to be distrustful of their rocketry neighbors, even if a few distrustful users really want that feature.
    Transparent is nice and if someone doesn't want it (that is the relay option), they can go buy something else for that matter! Kurt

  5. #185
    Join Date
    22nd February 2013
    Location
    Garland, TX
    Posts
    3,683
    I like the logic of not making the relay feature optional. In my eyes, the idea of randomly launched relays helping in the search for a rocket is one of the truly distinguishing features of this product. There are multiple products that can give you reliable tracking under 15k where most of our rockets stay, but none of them can offer airborne relays to assist in tracking after landing or over the horizon...a modest hill, some long grass, and stiff wind can mess up your day even on a 3k' flight (I know from experience).
    So much of my rocket building time has been diverted toward my "other hobby": Race Timing

  6. #186
    Join Date
    19th January 2009
    Location
    Alexandria VA
    Posts
    1,310
    I am definitely looking to buy this system. To me, the unique features that are really drawing me to it are the relay feature (put that on a quadcopter and go up a few hundred feet, which works for everyone using the system), the 'talking' app so I can continue watching a flight while still getting information (vs looking at my phone), and the landing spot prediction based on the last few fixes. And, it looks like it will size wise fit into just about anything 54mm airframe and up.

    Sign me up, Adrian!
    Mark Rose, KG7NWI
    TRA #11717 L3

  7. #187
    Join Date
    15th February 2009
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    567
    Quote Originally Posted by Viperfixr View Post
    I am definitely looking to buy this system. To me, the unique features that are really drawing me to it are the relay feature (put that on a quadcopter and go up a few hundred feet, which works for everyone using the system), the 'talking' app so I can continue watching a flight while still getting information (vs looking at my phone), and the landing spot prediction based on the last few fixes. And, it looks like it will size wise fit into just about anything 54mm airframe and up.

    Sign me up, Adrian!
    Hmm, unless I'm missing something it easily fits into a 38mm and very possibly a 29mm airframe. I have a 38mm CF Mongoose that I'm planning on putting it in as well as the 38mm sustainer of the Nike-Apache. From what I can tell it should fit into a 38mm nosecone.

    Looks like it will be after Christmas now but I still have a CC standing by...


    Tony
    why do people put so much stuff in their sigs?

  8. #188
    Join Date
    12th April 2017
    Location
    Pacific Palisades, CA
    Posts
    13
    I have the same plan for my Mongoose and my heart stopped for a moment when I saw that he must have been looking at length, 42.4mm, not width which is 20.32mm.
    NAR LEVEL 2

  9. #189
    Join Date
    22nd January 2009
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    2,062
    Quote Originally Posted by Viperfixr View Post
    I am definitely looking to buy this system. To me, the unique features that are really drawing me to it are the relay feature (put that on a quadcopter and go up a few hundred feet, which works for everyone using the system), the 'talking' app so I can continue watching a flight while still getting information (vs looking at my phone), and the landing spot prediction based on the last few fixes. And, it looks like it will size wise fit into just about anything 54mm airframe and up.

    Sign me up, Adrian!
    Quote Originally Posted by manixFan View Post
    Hmm, unless I'm missing something it easily fits into a 38mm and very possibly a 29mm airframe. I have a 38mm CF Mongoose that I'm planning on putting it in as well as the 38mm sustainer of the Nike-Apache. From what I can tell it should fit into a 38mm nosecone.

    Looks like it will be after Christmas now but I still have a CC standing by...


    Tony
    Quote Originally Posted by Burtech View Post
    I have the same plan for my Mongoose and my heart stopped for a moment when I saw that he must have been looking at length, 42.4mm, not width which is 20.32mm.
    Thanks, guys. It will fit into anything 24mm diameter and up.
    Adrian Adamson
    Featherweight Altimeters LLC
    www.featherweightaltimeters.com

  10. #190
    Join Date
    26th November 2009
    Posts
    4,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian A View Post
    Once we get the first production build done and the first run shipping, then the data logging is one of the first advanced features I plan to implement. I figure I need to have it implemented before asking Tripoli for their blessing on it. I'd like to have that done this winter/spring, so I can go for a record or two at the 2018 LDRS in May. Maybe I should sponsor a contest like I did at the Kloudbuster's LDRS a few years back.
    Correct me if I'm mistaken but doesn't TRA (and maybe NAR for that matter) want the device to write to
    onboard ROM only and then hand off the device to a local representative (Prefect or what have you) for processing?
    I think but don't hold me to this that things like writing to MicroSD cards is not acceptable.
    Also Rf recording is not acceptable in the pursuant of altitude records so any device that is a tracker only
    cannot be approved and an appropriate high altitude chipset must be used. No Sirf chipsets mind you.
    They're great for getting your rocket back and quite accurate on lat/long but really not so good with the dynamics of a rocket flight as far as altitude reporting is concerned.

    That said, I did receive email from a fellow who flew a 2 meter band AP510 SirfIV (not acceptable) GPS chipset tracker
    right next to a Beeline HP GPS 70cm tracker (record acceptable) in a high altitude balloon. This was a balloon guy
    mind you and was curious about the differences in the two GPS chipsets. He wrote me that with the sedate flying of
    a high altitude balloon the reported altitudes of the two trackers correlated the same no matter what altitude.
    I believe it was above 90k too. It only proves that for slow flights Sirf chipsets can work. John Coker showed
    data SirfIV didn't work well with the high dynamics of rocket flying: http://www.jcrocket.com/gps-tracking.shtml
    Hence, they're not acceptable for records (except maybe for balloon fliers!)

    The other thing that readers/potential buyers might fail to recognize is the increased precision
    by using combined U.S. GPS and Russian GNSS satellite constellations that Adrian states on the website. This is the only Rocket tracker out there (so far) that can do this. What good is it? Well it can lead to more accurate positioning and a more stable position when the rocket is down. Some of the stability can depend upon whether or not the GPS receiver has a good aperture to the sky but GPS/Glonass beats GPS alone in most circumstances.

    I was tooling with 3DR radios with Ublox GPS chipsets where I could turn GPS and GPS/Glonass on and off at will. Could let the UCenter utility compile position data for both protocols and the combined system has increased precision that's readily apparent.

    Now I'm not chucking my "plain" GPS trackers as they've worked well since the Beelines
    in the early "oughts" (2000's). Even the economical GPS trackers have their place with sport flying. If one is really going to push the recovery distance out far, they need as much an edge as they can get to achieve a successful recovery. Kurt
    Last edited by ksaves2; 21st December 2017 at 03:26 PM. Reason: Corrected name

  11. #191
    Join Date
    22nd January 2009
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    2,062
    Quote Originally Posted by ksaves2 View Post
    Correct me if I'm mistaken but doesn't TRA (and maybe NAR for that matter) want the device to write to
    onboard ROM only and then hand off the device to a local representative (Prefect or what have you) for processing?
    I think but don't hold me to this that things like writing to MicroSD cards is not acceptable.
    Also Rf recording is not acceptable in the pursuant of altitude records so any device that is a tracker only
    cannot be approved and an appropriate high altitude chipset must be used. No Sirf chipsets mind you.
    They're great for getting your rocket back and quite accurate on lat/long but really not so good with the dynamics of a rocket flight as far as altitude reporting is concerned.

    All I know is what I have seen on TRA's record rules page, and there they state that the data must be recorded and not just transmitted. This makes sense to me because with a whole flight's worth of data to review, there's enough information there to see that it was a real flight, whereas if your tracker doesn't have great range and you only get a packet or two of information near apogee, it would be harder to be confident that the data came from a real flight. I don't think TRA should prohibit recording to external media like microSD cards, and I'm not sure they do. However, the Featherweight tracker will record to unused flash memory in the microcontroller to save cost and size, while still recording 10Hz data for a high altitude ascent.
    Adrian Adamson
    Featherweight Altimeters LLC
    www.featherweightaltimeters.com

  12. #192
    Join Date
    26th November 2009
    Posts
    4,907
    Yes, I'm begging for correction here but I believe all those trackers on that page write to onboard memory. I definitely know that the beeline GPS trackers only have onboard memory. If I were you Adrian I'd send a question to the records committee and see what is acceptable. The committee might frown upon primary data submission on a microSD card only. Get the information direct from Tripoli and design accordingly. Kurt

  13. #193
    Join Date
    22nd January 2009
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    2,062
    Quote Originally Posted by ksaves2 View Post
    Yes, I'm begging for correction here but I believe all those trackers on that page write to onboard memory. I definitely know that the beeline GPS trackers only have onboard memory. If I were you Adrian I'd send a question to the records committee and see what is acceptable. The committee might frown upon primary data submission on a microSD card only. Get the information direct from Tripoli and design accordingly. Kurt
    The Featherweight Tracker will have on-board logging, so if another manufacturer wants external memory to be allowed, then they should ask for that.
    Adrian Adamson
    Featherweight Altimeters LLC
    www.featherweightaltimeters.com

  14. #194
    Join Date
    26th November 2009
    Posts
    4,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian A View Post
    The Featherweight Tracker will have on-board logging, so if another manufacturer wants external memory to be allowed, then they should ask for that.
    With the use of the Ublox chipset, potential record chasers shouldn't have anything to worry about then. Kurt

  15. #195
    Join Date
    22nd January 2009
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    2,062
    Well, it looks like were not going to get done with the software in time for Christmas delivery. We have been making good progress, but this initial version just has a lot of complicated software that has to be right the first time, in order to make sure that the user experience is simple and reliable. Sorry for the delay for those who were hoping to put a tracker under the tree instead of an IOU. We are still putting pedal to the metal and Ill continue to provide updates as we get closer to taking orders.
    Adrian Adamson
    Featherweight Altimeters LLC
    www.featherweightaltimeters.com

  16. #196
    Join Date
    22nd February 2013
    Location
    Garland, TX
    Posts
    3,683
    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian A View Post
    Well, it looks like we’re not going to get done with the software in time for Christmas delivery. We have been making good progress, but this initial version just has a lot of complicated software that has to be right the first time, in order to make sure that the user experience is simple and reliable. Sorry for the delay for those who were hoping to put a tracker under the tree instead of an IOU. We are still putting pedal to the metal and I’ll continue to provide updates as we get closer to taking orders.
    I think we all appreciate the dedication to get it right over getting it right now. I'm just afraid you will sell out while I am completely off the grid on a little post-Christmas getaway...if you can take until the 30th to get it perfect that would work out great.
    So much of my rocket building time has been diverted toward my "other hobby": Race Timing

  17. #197
    Join Date
    19th January 2009
    Location
    Alexandria VA
    Posts
    1,310
    Adrian, I'll get one regardless--no hurry. I know you only put out the best and waiting for that is no problem. Enjoy your Christmas!
    Mark Rose, KG7NWI
    TRA #11717 L3

  18. #198
    Join Date
    3rd September 2012
    Location
    Dumas, TX
    Posts
    345
    Take your time we will wait


    Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum
    TRA # 09357
    L3

    L1 DG&A Defender
    L2 DG&A Defender
    L3 Polecat Goblin

  19. #199
    Join Date
    10th July 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,267
    I would love to buy some of these. Looks like a great product, but I am allergic to Apple.
    TRA 13430, Level 3

    "Everybody's simulation model is guilty until proven innocent" (Thomas H. Lawrence 1994)

  20. #200
    Join Date
    22nd January 2009
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    2,062
    Quote Originally Posted by Cl(VII) View Post
    I think we all appreciate the dedication to get it right over getting it right now. I'm just afraid you will sell out while I am completely off the grid on a little post-Christmas getaway...if you can take until the 30th to get it perfect that would work out great.
    Quote Originally Posted by Viperfixr View Post
    Adrian, I'll get one regardless--no hurry. I know you only put out the best and waiting for that is no problem. Enjoy your Christmas!
    Quote Originally Posted by Mightyrocketman View Post
    Take your time we will wait


    Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum
    Thanks for your support and understanding.

    Quote Originally Posted by OverTheTop View Post
    I would love to buy some of these. Looks like a great product, but I am allergic to Apple.
    Making an Android version is a high priority for us.
    Adrian Adamson
    Featherweight Altimeters LLC
    www.featherweightaltimeters.com

  21. #201
    Join Date
    26th November 2009
    Posts
    4,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian A View Post
    The Featherweight Tracker will have on-board logging, so if another manufacturer wants external memory to be allowed, then they should ask for that.
    I believe if the device writes the lat/long, GPS altitude (MSL), number of satellites locked for the positioning to onboard memory and the GPS time stamps with a Ublox GPS chipset, the device will likely be accepted. If there is facility to save data to a MicroSD card concurrently, I don't think the records committee would take issue. As long as the device can be removed or accessed by the committee's agent to read the
    ONBOARD
    memory ON the device it will be accepted.

    I inquired about the requirements about two and a half years ago to the records committee simply because I was curious about tracker requirements. This flyer is never going to be able to attack a record. The reply I received was they are more concerned about a protocol that can't be tampered with. Writing direct to memory on the device is the simplest way to fulfill that requirement.
    MicroSD and removable memory can be switched or tampered with. A record agent could be handed off the device directly in the field or if they have experience with said device, download the data in vivo while still in the rocket.

    I remember in some unrelated correspondence several years ago with Greg Clark, he told me he received a letter from the TRA Bod or records committee that the Beeline GPS tracker was accepted for TRA records without ever petitioning for it. At the time there were a dearth of GPS trackers out there and someone
    petitioned its use unbeknownst to Greg. If I recall he said he was surprised of this development.

    Nonetheless you record chasers need to be aware there are arrangements to be made in advance.
    It's not so simple to show up and fly. Kurt
    Last edited by ksaves2; 21st December 2017 at 05:27 PM. Reason: grammar, danged speech software!!!

  22. #202
    Join Date
    26th November 2009
    Posts
    4,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian A View Post
    Thanks for your support and understanding.



    Making an Android version is a high priority for us.
    Having the ability to directly pull the strings off and live track on a map eliminates input errors when data has to be transferred by hand. If it's done automatically one can have an up-to-date picture as to the position and status of the flight.

    The other advantage is that one can see obstructions in the way to the recovery site and can plan accordingly. Sometimes it's better to drive on road than walk directly straight to the downed rocket. Not so much a problem in the wide open spaces out west but in other parts of the country it's very helpful to be able to do this and plan the track to the recovery site. Kurt
    Last edited by ksaves2; 21st December 2017 at 05:21 PM. Reason: grammar

  23. #203
    Join Date
    13th June 2014
    Location
    Cocoa Beach, FL
    Posts
    3,551
    Any updates on release date?
    Tim
    L3 NAR 98225

  24. #204
    Join Date
    12th April 2017
    Location
    Pacific Palisades, CA
    Posts
    13
    The Featherweight site says......

    Available Early January 2018. Check back soon!
    NAR LEVEL 2

  25. #205
    Join Date
    22nd January 2009
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    2,062
    Were working hard to keep that estimate accurate, but there are no guarantees.

    The first release will have:
    • The same LoRa radio performance that tracked the 137,000 foot BALLS flight
    • Software on all the boards that updates each other wirelessly and automatically for every app update
    • Tracker and ground station pre-configured to work together (sold in pairs only for this release)
    • Compatible with dozens to hundreds of other users operating at the same launch
    • iOS compatibility and new user interface screens
    • New Bluetooth LE management working behind the scenes
    • Hooks for advanced features to be added with upcoming app updates
    Adrian Adamson
    Featherweight Altimeters LLC
    www.featherweightaltimeters.com

  26. #206
    Join Date
    26th November 2009
    Posts
    4,907
    Once it's out there, it looks like it will be setting the bar up pretty high for a GPS tracking system that can be had without a Ham License.
    That reminds me, the distal tree that my inverted L wire antenna is in is dead and am going to have to likely find another tree to use to secure the
    end. When the propagation gods were smiling one time, I conversed with a fellow in Tahiti on the 12 meter band on with a 5 watt Yaesu FT-817ND
    feeding a 100 watt out amplifier going to the antenna auto tuner. Kinda fun when the epoxy or paint is drying on the rocket. (Plus can use the skills
    acquired for tracking on the 2 meter and 70cm bands.) Though............. With this LoRa device (if it performs as advertised) a ham license will no longer be necessary for good performance. Kurt

  27. #207
    Join Date
    29th February 2016
    Location
    West Coast of Canada
    Posts
    75
    Hopefully this product will be available for Canadian, UK and Australian customers as well.


    Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum

  28. #208
    Join Date
    23rd October 2015
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    66
    Quote Originally Posted by midpower_madness View Post
    Hopefully this product will be available for Canadian, UK and Australian customers as well.
    Indeed!
    John
    TRA #14574 L2

  29. #209
    Join Date
    1st May 2009
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by OverTheTop View Post
    I would love to buy some of these. Looks like a great product, but I am allergic to Apple.
    +1. I'll wait until the Android app is functional before ordering...

    AMRS L3
    Max Alt AGL - 23,908ft - K300 - Balls 22
    Max V - 2,488 ft/s, ~Mach 2.2 - M2250 - THUNDA 2015

Similar Threads

  1. A-10 Live Fire At The Nevada Test and Training Range
    By Winston in forum The Watering Hole
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 3rd August 2017, 03:39 AM
  2. Eggfinder range - ground test and launch results
    By Dad Man Walking in forum Rocketry Electronics and Software
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 20th September 2014, 04:18 AM
  3. GPS-tracker radio range: how much is enough?
    By FROB in forum Rocketry Electronics and Software
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 16th June 2009, 02:52 PM
  4. Eastern (shore) Test Range Dr. Zooch Testing
    By Dr.Zooch in forum Low Power Rocketry (LPR)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 24th October 2005, 04:27 AM
  5. A very nice result
    By Garnaralf in forum The Watering Hole
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 30th September 2005, 05:28 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •