Gary Larsen's Bovine Farside Rocket - A BT-80H Scratch Build

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

lakeroadster

When in doubt... build hell-for-stout!
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
8,712
Reaction score
10,803
Location
Central Colorado
Here's the Farside cartoon:

Larsen Rocket Measured.png
So can this rocket be made to fly? I took a quick look at it in OpenRocket.

2024-03-19 Open Rocket Simulation 3D Finished.jpg2024-03-19 Open Rocket Simulation 3D Unfinished.jpg2024-03-19 Open Rocket Simulation Side View.jpg

That huge front nose cone is wreaking havoc with the simulation. I guess a swing test of a mock up is in order?
 
Last edited:
You will have to hard input some base drag hacks behind that huge witches hat nose cone. Otherwise the sim is just sour milk. That computer machine will melt faster than ice cream in July.

Are we talking real aged barn wood planking? Real galvanized metal, silo top styled nose cone? Tiny hidden tractor motors?
 
The nose cone of a rocket always tends to move the CP forward, so that sim might not be too far off. And that's without any base drag effect of the overhang pulling it further forward still.
 
Are we talking real aged barn wood planking? Real galvanized metal, silo top styled nose cone? Tiny hidden tractor motors?
A metal nose cone on a MPR? Oh, the horror. :eek:

You Sir have been reported to NAR Compliance, NARC for short. :cool:
 
Last edited:
To demonstrate the impact of that huge nose cone I dropped the lower diameter of the cone down to 3"... and look at the stability difference.

2024-03-20 Open Rocket Simulation Small Nose Cone 3D Finished .jpg2024-03-19 Open Rocket Simulation 3D Finished.jpg
 
To demonstrate the impact of that huge nose cone I dropped the lower diameter of the cone down to 3"... and look at the stability difference.

So if you fudge a little - after all, measurements from a cartoon are not all that precise - you could reduce the cone's base diameter, and increase the body tube length. How much nose weight have you got in there? You could also raise the CG by building the fin can a little lighter; try "heck for sturdy" for a change.
 
You will have to hard input some base drag hacks behind that huge witches hat nose cone. Otherwise the sim is just sour milk. That computer machine will melt faster than ice cream in July.
If I add a BDH behind the nose cone, it increases stability to 0.92 calibers. Again... a spin test is needed. :headspinning:
2024-03-20 Open Rocket Simulation BDH Dual 3D Finished .jpg
 
So if you fudge a little - after all, measurements from a cartoon are not all that precise - you could reduce the cone's base diameter, and increase the body tube length.
Sure, I could do that, but nope... not gonna do it. It's the principle of the thing. Make it to scale, or don't make it.​
Kind of like putting Lexan fins on a rocket... :barf:
How much nose weight have you got in there?
1" dia steel bar x 3-3/4" long, or about 13.4 ounces.​
You could also raise the CG by building the fin can a little lighter; try "heck for sturdy" for a change.
Design for Manufacturability... I already have the materials. Surface mounted 1/4" plywood fins, using the minimum diameter fin attachment method.​
TRF-161479 -16-2.jpg TRF-161479-16-1.jpg


 
You will have to hard input some base drag hacks behind that huge witches hat nose cone.
Is it still a BASE drag hack if it is the NOSE of the steed?

Does the FLARING of the structure affect the hack, as opposed to a cylindrical fat bottom rocket?
 
Sure, I could do that, but nope... not gonna do it. It's the principle of the thing. Make it to scale, or don't make it.​
Kind of like putting Lexan fins on a rocket... :barf:
Yes, I totally get that. I'm just saying that what scale is exactly, from a hand drawn cartoon panel, may be open to a little bit of "interpretation". I mean, if you squint, maybe you can take a quarter inch off here and add a half inch there. ;) Every little bit helps.

On the serious side, I'm more than a little uneasy about the result of the base drag cone under the nose cone. Since that drag is acting on the base of the nose cone (up front) instead of the the base of the rocket (down back) I'm pretty sure it should have made matters worse, not better. The bottom line is, since you swing test everything, it's all academic.
 
Just hurry up and get it to the swing test and launch video. We all want to know whether to say "well done" or "I told you so" and although I'm betting on the latter, I'd like it to be the former. :)
 
Last edited:
All that base area under the cartoon nose cone is just screaming for some tiny plugged 13mm or micromax canted tractor motors if they could fit. AND, if it looks good with hiddenmotors, all problems solved. Turn those nasty vortices into lovely up front weight and thrust, both of whom are great friends of the silly oddroc flyer.

To quote from the Holy Grail: "and suddenly the animator suffered a fatal heart attack and the cartoon peril was no more." The quest to fly accurately proportioned cartoon rockets could continue. :)
 
All that base area under the cartoon nose cone is just screaming for some tiny plugged 13mm or micromax canted tractor motors if they could fit. AND, if it looks good with hiddenmotors, all problems solved. Turn those nasty vortices into lovely up front weight and thrust, both of whom are great friends of the silly oddroc flyer.

To quote from the Holy Grail: "and suddenly the animator suffered a fatal heart attack and the cartoon peril was no more." The quest to fly accurately proportioned cartoon rockets could continue. :)
Heck, D motors would fit up there. Quan. (6), with an F-15 BP motor at the rear. But the altitude is only 255 feet.​
Let me ponder the cost and complexity of this. Doesn't seem like a hill I want to climb.​
And trying to get BP motors to fire at the same time as composite motors... very, very problematic​
 
Last edited:
Wrong Thread... :facepalm: Moved to: Gary Larsen's Farside Rocket - A BT-80H Scratch Build

Nose Cone Repair

The day after I turned the nose cone I noticed the crack was opening up... like considerably. I used a band clamp and clamped the bottom for 24 hours, periodically checking and re-tightening to close up the crack.​
Then I applied wood glue and clamped it again. I'm pretty sure it's back to where it was when I initially turned the piece.​

001.JPG 002.JPG
 
Last edited:
Back
Top