New tracker range test result

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
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".:wink: Shame on them!!:no: 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- 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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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).
 
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!
 
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
 
I have the same plan for my Mongoose and my heart stopped for a moment when I saw that :surprised: he must have been looking at length, 42.4mm, not width which is 20.32mm.
 
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

I have the same plan for my Mongoose and my heart stopped for a moment when I saw that :surprised: 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.
 
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: https://www.jcrocket.com/gps-tracking.shtml
Hence, they're not acceptable for records (except maybe for balloon fliers!):wink:

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:
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
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. :wink:
 
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!
 
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. :wink:

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!

Take your time we will wait


Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum

Thanks for your support and understanding.

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.
 
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:
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:
We’re 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
 
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
 
Hopefully this product will be available for Canadian, UK and Australian customers as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum
 
It's been a while since my last update. After many more hours of software development and testing, we're getting closer opening up orders for our first small production run. This weekend there will be more test flights in Arizona where we will get a chance to see multiple units in action at once.

While Kevin is making updates to the iPhone app, I'm currently working on the public coordination advanced feature. This is the one where your ground station will communicate with other ground stations at the launch so you can see what channels other users are occupying, and see some basic info about their flight status so that you decide if you want to watch their flight from your phone. So far, it's not ready for incorporation into this weekend's flights, but it's close enough now that there's a chance it could go later this weekend.

Next up on the advanced features list is the lost rocket relay. This is a function that could have some cross-over usefulness for my day job in aerospace avionics, so I'm motivated to get it done sooner rather than later.

Sorry my previous schedule estimates haven't been closer to the mark, but rest assured we have the pedal to the metal.
 
Back
Top