iter
HPR Glider Driver
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,144
- Reaction score
- 73
I joined my local NAR club in December 2011. Since then, I've been to every single launch of my club (2 a month) and some launches at other area clubs. I have designed, built and flown a number of R/C boost gliders without an incident, including my L1 ship; I have designed from the ground up and flown a number of HP rockets, including my 4" L2 ship. Indeed, the largest rocket I built form a kit is was a little LOC HiTech. This whole time I had one flight failure. I have also built a number of odd-rocks, including an aerodynamically stable foam pumpkin for Halloween. I mention all this here to give an idea of my level of commitment to the hobby and to safety, as well as to illustrate a basic understanding of rocket design.
My initial design for my L3 ship is a biplane glider. This gets rejected as violating the spirit of NAR L3 requirements. I can find nothing in the L3 requirements document that my glider violates, but I don't want to make a fuss, so I go away and come back with a 4-fin cylindrical design, an upscale of this rocket which I have flown successfully: https://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?46095-Blue-Bonnet-breakaway-stack-of-buckets. A crucial difference for the M-size version is that in addition to the apogee event, it deploys a conventional main parachute at 600', with redundant altimeters.
The L3CC rep rejects my idea, with two justifications: (a) my L1 and L2 are recent; (b) my fascination with odd-rocs is misplaced. He says that he hopes I wouldn't recommend a newbie make one R/C flight on a trainer 40, then immediately try his hand with a 300+ MPH bird with dual turbine jets.
Now I don't want to make this a thread about what NAR rules should be. Maybe there should be a rule that says you need to wait so many years between L2 and L3. Or maybe there should be a rule that you must burn so many Ns between your L2 and L3. Or maybe there should be a rule that L3 rockets have an ogive nosecone. If you think these rules are good ideas, I encourage you to go and legislate them. My rant is not about these (hypothetical) rules.
My rant is about unwritten rules. There are the L3 requirements, and then there are what appear to be the real rules. Why have formal, written rules at all, if we are apparently living by another, unwritten set?
Ari.
P.S. If you think my design is unsound, I want to hear your feedback.
My initial design for my L3 ship is a biplane glider. This gets rejected as violating the spirit of NAR L3 requirements. I can find nothing in the L3 requirements document that my glider violates, but I don't want to make a fuss, so I go away and come back with a 4-fin cylindrical design, an upscale of this rocket which I have flown successfully: https://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?46095-Blue-Bonnet-breakaway-stack-of-buckets. A crucial difference for the M-size version is that in addition to the apogee event, it deploys a conventional main parachute at 600', with redundant altimeters.
The L3CC rep rejects my idea, with two justifications: (a) my L1 and L2 are recent; (b) my fascination with odd-rocs is misplaced. He says that he hopes I wouldn't recommend a newbie make one R/C flight on a trainer 40, then immediately try his hand with a 300+ MPH bird with dual turbine jets.
Now I don't want to make this a thread about what NAR rules should be. Maybe there should be a rule that says you need to wait so many years between L2 and L3. Or maybe there should be a rule that you must burn so many Ns between your L2 and L3. Or maybe there should be a rule that L3 rockets have an ogive nosecone. If you think these rules are good ideas, I encourage you to go and legislate them. My rant is not about these (hypothetical) rules.
My rant is about unwritten rules. There are the L3 requirements, and then there are what appear to be the real rules. Why have formal, written rules at all, if we are apparently living by another, unwritten set?
Ari.
P.S. If you think my design is unsound, I want to hear your feedback.