NFPA vs. mass launches

[mccordmw]

I work in the life science, chemicals, and pharma industry. By the nature of the work, we come into contact with all sorts of nasty chemical. As such, we're pretty serious about safety. We've always had an industry leading safety record. However, things really started to improve when we started mandating reporting of near misses. The data collected helped spot safety trends and prevent injuries.

Unless TRA and NAR start a program where they proactively request clubs to report near misses, it will be difficult to assess the overall risk of any of the activities. It was difficult to get buy-in within our company to report near misses, so I suspect it will be more difficult to get all the clubs to coordinate well. Setting up a standard reporting form online at both organizations would really help.

I'd like to see data on how often we have really close calls like this:

[video=youtube;bfcud62ct6M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfcud62ct6M[/video]

And in mass launches, how often do we have close calls like this (at 1:35):

[video=youtube;9rSiArBu3Hw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rSiArBu3Hw[/video]

 

[ksaves2]

In close call crash what was the failure mode? Was it able to be ascertained? Harness failure?

Drag races? That's a very hot button issue. Kurt

 

[mccordmw]

In close call crash what was the failure mode? Was it able to be ascertained? Harness failure?

Drag races? That's a very hot button issue. Kurt

In that first video, freeze it at 40s. The whole rocket is intact. Looks like there was no deployment, so it's not harness failure. The usual suspects would apply: electronics issue, bad ematch, insufficient charge, etc. That one looked scary. Imagine the energy it's bringing down about 6' from that kid.



In the mass launch, it looks like the booster separated, so harness failure? It looks like people didn't even notice it come down among the crowd. I couldn't hear any horns or warning shouts.

All good stuff to capture on a near miss form.

 

[rharshberger]

In that first video, freeze it at 40s. The whole rocket is intact. Looks like there was no deployment, so it's not harness failure. The usual suspects would apply: electronics issue, bad ematch, insufficient charge, etc. That one looked scary. Imagine the energy it's bringing down about 6' from that kid.

View attachment 312922

In the mass launch, it looks like the booster separated, so harness failure? It looks like people didn't even notice it come down among the crowd. I couldn't hear any horns or warning shouts.

All good stuff to capture on a near miss form.

Actually the LCO was calling out "HEADS UP" at least twice. Notice the incoming whistle of the rocket wasn't heard until too late to identify direction before slamming into the ground.

 

[mccordmw]

Actually the LCO was calling out "HEADS UP" at least twice. Notice the incoming whistle of the rocket wasn't heard until too late to identify direction before slamming into the ground.

Yeah, he called out pretty early and repeated the warning at least 4 more times. The call was good. Looks like some people scattering (good), but some weren't paying too much attention though.

I didn't hear any calls on the second video. But it just might not be clear to me.

Edit: My bad. There were people yelling heads up. A warning horn also went off like 1/2 a second before impact...too late there. I still can't tell if the crowd really knew where the booster was. Nobody seemed to react much?

 

[mccordmw]

I also like how, in the first video, the LCO kept telling people to stay away from the rocket in case the electronics still triggered a deployment charge. That was nice.

 

[Steve Shannon]

Part of the 2005 Safety Report from NAR was the recommended reporting of incidents so that future safety analyses could be even more complete.
After reading concerns here last night, and Dave's response to my suggestions, I re skimmed it. It's 118 pages including various appendices, but it's well worth reading by all responsible club members of both NAR and Tripoli.
https://www.nar.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/launchsafe.pdf

Also, I read Ted Cochran's report on the fatality from a few years back involving a two rocket drag race at a Scout rocketry event:
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=927015314057914&id=400917946667656

Finally, both Tripoli and NAR have forms for reporting incidents to insurance. I don't know if they are to be used to report near misses, but I'll ask. Tripoli's is here:
https://www.tripoli.org/Portals/1/Documents/Insurance/TRA Insurance Incident Form v1.0.pdf

I think that the idea of reporting near misses is a very good one. I wonder if it would work to have a way to report them online like we should do MESS reports. Of course we all know how difficult it is to get those reported, but some people are very good about it.

Steve Shannon

 

[DavidMcCann]

Well, I'm not sure about everyone else, but our flight cards do have a flight result spot. Successful, CATO, No Ejection, etc. Ideally the LCO/spotter/assistant are filling these out. I don't think we track drag races as such, just as flights.

Getting clubs to report near misses is going to be about as hard as getting people to report breaking their waiver.

The only incidents that seem to get investigated are injury/fatalities. Near misses all get a shrug, and the next countdown goes. Much of this I think the best way to deal with it is at the club level. Better if you're changing attitudes from the ground up, instead of forcing rules on people from the top. Perhaps the same idea is the way to with drag races, night launches, etc.

 

[Steve Shannon]

Well, I'm not sure about everyone else, but our flight cards do have a flight result spot. Successful, CATO, No Ejection, etc. Ideally the LCO/spotter/assistant are filling these out. I don't think we track drag races as such, just as flights.

Getting clubs to report near misses is going to be about as hard as getting people to report breaking their waiver.

The only incidents that seem to get investigated are injury/fatalities. Near misses all get a shrug, and the next countdown goes. Much of this I think the best way to deal with it is at the club level. Better if you're changing attitudes from the ground up, instead of forcing rules on people from the top. Perhaps the same idea is the way to with drag races, night launches, etc.

I'm sorry; I don't understand how to parse your last sentence.
I absolutely agree about not inflicting more rules from the top.

 

[DavidMcCann]

I'm sorry; I don't understand how to parse your last sentence.
I absolutely agree about not inflicting more rules from the top.

Sorry.... Not sleeping enough lately. I opened this up saying we should push rules from the top to ban drag races. The discussion turned to reporting near misses. I suggested the best way to deal with near miss reporting was on the local level. I then added that perhaps the same local level movement may be more appropriate for dealing with reducing/eliminating drag races and night launches.

 

[Handeman]

...... Near misses all get a shrug, and the next countdown goes.

That is so true of all aspects of rocketry, not just failed or ballistic recovery. I see it in probably half the DD flights when they are flown drogueless. Many people don't even recognize a near miss, especially when it isn't safety related.

So I still haven't figured out what people think is so dangerous with drag races. All of the incidences they talk about are failed recovery/ballistic returns. That is what cause the tragedy in California. Safe distances are enforced to mitigate some of the risk. That is why complex rockets/clusters have larger safe distances then single motor rockets. I don't see any reason not to treat drag races the same way you would a complex or clustered rockets. Move them further out.

maybe RSO one or two of the rockets so you don't get a shower of FG all over the place. But, just keep carelessly tossing huge rockets hastily and poorly built into the sky and laugh when they auger in or blow themselves up.

When have you ever seen a rocket not get RSOed? Drag race or not? You are implying that any club that allows drag races also completely ignores all safety requirements and don't RSO rockets. As an RSO in a club that does have an occasional drag race, I feel that is insulting.

The danger in drag races isn't the number of rockets, its the same thing that is dangerous with any rocket flight, a failed/ballistic recovery. In most cases if a drag race is going off, it's announced and the LCO has everyone's attention. The spectators and fliers are much more likely to see and respond to a failed recovery while watching the drag race launch then if it happens during a single flight they are not bothering to watch or pay attention to and have no idea where the rocket might be when any warning is given. Given the fact that more people are watching and paying attention to what is going on around them during a drag race, it might actually be safer then a series of individual launches that many don't pay attention to.

 

[Steve Shannon]

Sorry.... Not sleeping enough lately. I opened this up saying we should push rules from the top to ban drag races. The discussion turned to reporting near misses. I suggested the best way to deal with near miss reporting was on the local level. I then added that perhaps the same local level movement may be more appropriate for dealing with reducing/eliminating drag races and night launches.

Thanks, that helps.
The morphing from a drag race ban to near miss reports started when we discussed statistics that might help us understand what level of risk drag races cause. Collecting near miss reports is something that needs to be done at the local level also, but it might be helpful if we could provide a uniform framework at the national level so the data from local clubs could be combined and analyzed someday.

 

[DavidMcCann]

That is so true of all aspects of rocketry, not just failed or ballistic recovery. I see it in probably half the DD flights when they are flown drogueless. Many people don't even recognize a near miss, especially when it isn't safety related.

So I still haven't figured out what people think is so dangerous with drag races. All of the incidences they talk about are failed recovery/ballistic returns. That is what cause the tragedy in California. Safe distances are enforced to mitigate some of the risk. That is why complex rockets/clusters have larger safe distances then single motor rockets. I don't see any reason not to treat drag races the same way you would a complex or clustered rockets. Move them further out.


When have you ever seen a rocket not get RSOed? Drag race or not? You are implying that any club that allows drag races also completely ignores all safety requirements and don't RSO rockets. As an RSO in a club that does have an occasional drag race, I feel that is insulting.

The danger in drag races isn't the number of rockets, its the same thing that is dangerous with any rocket flight, a failed/ballistic recovery. In most cases if a drag race is going off, it's announced and the LCO has everyone's attention. The spectators and fliers are much more likely to see and respond to a failed recovery while watching the drag race launch then if it happens during a single flight they are not bothering to watch or pay attention to and have no idea where the rocket might be when any warning is given. Given the fact that more people are watching and paying attention to what is going on around them during a drag race, it might actually be safer then a series of individual launches that many don't pay attention to.

The lack of RSO on rockets in drag races is a comment leveled directly at "build for event" drags that seem to have a higher than average failure rate (have it ready or you don't get your motor, etc) . Not at you. Sorry for that.


You raise good points, however I think you're downplaying the difficulty in tracking multiple rockets. Even if everyone is looking up because of the increased risk, that doesn't mitigate the risk of having multiple objects to track to a level lower than a typical single launch.

 

[FredA]

Given the fact that more people are watching and paying attention to what is going on around them during a drag race, it might actually be safer then a series of individual launches that many don't pay attention to.

I tried the same logic regarding L3 cert flights - which not only have everybody watching but have had two TAP's/L3CC's overlook the entire construction and assembly process. SHOULD be the safest, most reliable flights of all yet the org's pile on crap like redundant altimeters and allow sloppy certs.....so logic appears not to apply....but I digress and don't want to hijack this thread.

While everyone watches drag races (in general) the LCO/RSO cannot watch every rocket and often rockets are not tracked. As evidence, I would say rockets involved in DR's are harder to find because people loose track of their rocket and/or confuse it with others. People also tend to watch the first off the pad then try to catch up with the stragglers. So an RSO trying to keep track of anything coming in ballistic has a much harder time. Remember, there is usually only one person on the PA/Air-horn doing the warning - they can't watch them all.

Plus there is the problem of in-flight collisions. It happens...

I'm in favor of increased safety distances for drag races.

 

[soopirV]

And in mass launches, how often do we have close calls like this (at 1:35):

[video=youtube;9rSiArBu3Hw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rSiArBu3Hw[/video]

I was going to just keep quiet on this thread since I happen to think 2-rocket drag races are a lot of fun to watch, but this is just ignorant. I'm pretty sure it was done for the benefit of the TV camera, but to an earlier point, this isn't rocketry, this is pyrotechnics. Despite my professed enjoyment of drag races, I have to admit that rarely do they go perfectly, with one rocket sitting on the pad longer than expected...I mention that because the idea of a true race, wherein two separate flights occur using the same altimeter is a true measure of performance deltas between two builds...

 

[Handeman]

I guess I just don't like the idea of banning drag races and night launches at a NFPA or national association level. If a local club doesn't want to allow drag races or night launches, I have absolutely no problem with that. I just don't think it should be banned for everyone because some don't like it. The "I don't like it so you can't do it" way of thinking just sets me off. If you don't like it, don't do it, but don't tell me I can't. You might very well convince me I shouldn't do something, but please don't dictate what I can and can't do.

I'm more then happy to listen.

 

[FredA]

but please don't dictate what I can and can't do.

That's the job of insurance company actuarial departments.

 

[DavidMcCann]

I guess I just don't like the idea of banning drag races and night launches at a NFPA or national association level. If a local club doesn't want to allow drag races or night launches, I have absolutely no problem with that. I just don't think it should be banned for everyone because some don't like it. The "I don't like it so you can't do it" way of thinking just sets me off. If you don't like it, don't do it, but don't tell me I can't. You might very well convince me I shouldn't do something, but please don't dictate what I can and can't do.

I'm more then happy to listen.

I can understand that. I personally hate helmet laws.

The trouble is, we're not just talking about the person launching's safety here. Overall launch safety is within the realm of things we could expect TRA to regulate.

As for simply encouraging people to not have drags... I can understand the 2 rocket races....and Don't see them as a huge increase in risk.

Can we agree that launching 20 K's even at say 500' is a bad idea? and then work towards the middle of the two.

 

[ttabbal]

Just throwing an idea out there.... For large mass launches, say >4 rockets and L2 impulse levels or better... As recovery seems to be the biggest issue people bring up, why not require L3 cert level deployment redundancy? 2 redundant electronic deploy devices, plus motor eject if you have it. Maybe even require 2 types for L1 rockets, 1 electronic and 1 motor eject. With the current prices for electronics, it's not a big burden to require it for mass launches in my mind, and it at least provides a backup. It's not perfect, I've seen L3 cert deployment failures, but it's a lot better than nothing.

Having seen a number of drag races / mass launches, the only close calls I've witnessed are recovery related failures. I've seen the occasional ignition failure, but those don't pose a threat to spectators, so I don't worry about those. I've seen video of losing a fin, causing out of control rockets. I haven't seen that personally in a race, but I have seen it with single launches.

I do think it's best addressed at the local level, for now. Perhaps a club can demonstrate their changes and show some data on how the changes helped.

I see why people like them, and they can be spectacular. But I also see the increased opportunity for failure to cause injury. It's difficult, in some cases impossible, to track every projectile. And it only takes one person not noticing one ballistic inbound rocket. I wouldn't go so far as to say they should be banned entirely, but I would like to see a little more than increased offset distances considered. We all know how far a rocket can travel, even if the boost phase is perfect. I've seen ballistic recoveries impact many times the distance between the pads and the spectators.

Sure, there's inherent danger in rocketry. Same with shooting firearms. That doesn't mean playing Russian Roulette is a good idea.

 

[DavidMcCann]

Following the current TRA rules, drag races are effectively banned, to be totally honest. If you follow them anyways. (I've seen them skipped or fudged)

I can't remember if it was an LDRS or URRF, but we had to cancel a drag race for H motors because after running the math, we would have had to stop the launch, move the pads all WWAAAAAAAYYYYYYY out there, or clear the parking lot and move everyone in attendance down the road. Or run the entire event from a crazy distance. We decided scrubbing the drag was the best option.

 

[Kallahan11]

Even if they were built right, each flight is a risk. you add two in the air and there's no hope of tracking both. You add 10, 20...and you're just firing arrows in the air and hoping they don't hit you.

I absolutely and without reservation call for drag races to be outlawed by both the TRA and NFPA. Doubt I'll get far.

By this logic should we ban staged rockets? In high power you have effectively two rockets sized projectiles. I think its a complex launch, but I think it can be done safely. With a drag race you have at LEAST two sets of eyes to watch for rockets, probably a lot more. If we treat them as a complex rocket flight (double minimum safe distance) call heads up and multiple trackers for each rocket its plenty safe.

The reality of the matter with the boy scout leader is that it was a freak accident.
The reality of hobby rocketry is that it is exceptionally safe, 60 years of statistics don't lie. Far more people die golfing every year than rocketeering has ever killed.

Do I think there is a limit to drag races? yeah I'd keep it to two rockets, the more complexity the more chance for problems. The fact of the matter is while there may be double, triple or a 10x increase in risk with drag racing the base risk is so low it doesn't really matter.

 

[DavidMcCann]

By this logic should we ban staged rockets? In high power you have effectively two rockets sized projectiles. I think its a complex launch, but I think it can be done safely. With a drag race you have at LEAST two sets of eyes to watch for rockets, probably a lot more. If we treat them as a complex rocket flight (double minimum safe distance) call heads up and multiple trackers for each rocket its plenty safe.

Staged rockets have a place and purpose. It adds to ability and knowledge. Drag races do not.

 

[Threemorewishes]

The multiple M rocket drag race at LDRS31 was really cool, but the debris landing in front of our pop up was not. With all the smoke trails and zooming rockets it was hard to visually track specific items like the tracking transmitter that landed three feet from my elderly parents. I think adding distance is only going to mitigate some of the risk. Having rockets flying over the crowd is the biggest risk I see at Tripoli launches and this is for individual flights or mass launches. Adding distance might help but it won't keep rockets from going over the crowd if the rail direction is set incorrectly or the high level winds are pushing them around.

 

[CORZERO]

If you think model rockets are dangerous, check out the stats on motor vehicle fatalities in 2016!

https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812358

We MUST ban cars!

The world is a dangerous place, no doubt. If you feel that your safety is at risk, then rather than calling to ban other peoples' fun (those whom choose to assume the same risk anyone else does with any other inherently dangerous activity), stay home.

 

[DavidMcCann]

The world is a dangerous place, no doubt. If you feel that your safety is at risk, then rather than calling to ban other peoples' fun (those whom choose to assume the same risk anyone else does with any other inherently dangerous activity), stay home.

No. I'm going to make sure the hobby is as safe as possible.

If you don't like it, Stay home.

 

[DavidMcCann]

The ratio of drunken apes to armchair scientists in this hobby is depressing

 

[patelldp]

There are enough concerned rocketeers here to mobilize and collect data on failure rates without much effort. We as rocketeers can all agree at a minimum that the singular flight of a properly RSO'd rocket is "acceptable risk." The act of multiple concurrent flights is being called into question here.

I would not mind attending a local launch and taking diligent notes on the nature of each rocket flown with motor specifics, recovery schemes, and success rate. Based on my recollection of the last 18 years of flying rockets...I'd peg that success rate somewhere in the neighborhood of 60% to 70%, meaning 30% to 40% fail in some way. Home soldered electronics, CTI spacers, PML pistons, general neglect, and even I have contributed to bringing that number down from time to time.

Would you all like me to conduct a scientific type study of this over the course of the 2017 flying season? The parameters of a successful flight are quite simple:

1. Nominal stability
2. Nominal performance of the motor
3. Nominal performance of the deployment scheme, whether motor ejection or electronic based
4. Nominal performance and complete deployment of the recovery device with adequate descent rate (no 2" FG kits on streamers or 12" chutes)
5. Complete tracking to apogee with the minimal requirement of a positive affirmation of drogue deployment (rocket destabilization, no mystery lawn darts)
6. Rocket recovery away from populated flight line or dangerous obstacles such as power lines or structures and no OSHA type "near misses"

There are plenty of failure modes with a rocket flight. If spectated and tracked appropriately, risk can be further mitigated through real-time notification and peer awareness. Flying more than one rocket at a time greatly reduces the ability of the RSO, LCO, and spectators in general to identify a failure that may put people or property in harms way. Putting a drag race of 5 rockets 400' away versus 200' away does minuscule good in terms of risk avoidance, and that difference is based on zero empirical evidence. Putting a single rocket 200' away is also based on zero empirical evidence (and is probably just based on some arbitrary wire spool length) and carries with it inherent risk as well.

You all are asking for evidence and data before we try to take away the "fun" of drag races. I am telling you that I will gladly provide that data and analysis to you. Are you willing to accept the results and be an advocate for change should I undertake this effort? Are there any other volunteers to do this with me?

 

[Charles_McG]

Staged rockets have a place and purpose. It adds to ability and knowledge. Drag races do not.

I have an issue with the notion that an activity needs to be justified with a purpose greater than 'it pleases me'.

 

[rharshberger]

There are enough concerned rocketeers here to mobilize and collect data on failure rates without much effort. We as rocketeers can all agree at a minimum that the singular flight of a properly RSO'd rocket is "acceptable risk." The act of multiple concurrent flights is being called into question here.

I would not mind attending a local launch and taking diligent notes on the nature of each rocket flown with motor specifics, recovery schemes, and success rate. Based on my recollection of the last 18 years of flying rockets...I'd peg that success rate somewhere in the neighborhood of 60% to 70%, meaning 30% to 40% fail in some way. Home soldered electronics, CTI spacers, PML pistons, general neglect, and even I have contributed to bringing that number down from time to time.

Would you all like me to conduct a scientific type study of this over the course of the 2017 flying season? The parameters of a successful flight are quite simple:

1. Nominal stability
2. Nominal performance of the motor
3. Nominal performance of the deployment scheme, whether motor ejection or electronic based
4. Nominal performance and complete deployment of the recovery device with adequate descent rate (no 2" FG kits on streamers or 12" chutes)
5. Complete tracking to apogee with the minimal requirement of a positive affirmation of drogue deployment (rocket destabilization, no mystery lawn darts)
6. Rocket recovery away from populated flight line or dangerous obstacles such as power lines or structures and no OSHA type "near misses"

There are plenty of failure modes with a rocket flight. If spectated and tracked appropriately, risk can be further mitigated through real-time notification and peer awareness. Flying more than one rocket at a time greatly reduces the ability of the RSO, LCO, and spectators in general to identify a failure that may put people or property in harms way. Putting a drag race of 5 rockets 400' away versus 200' away does minuscule good in terms of risk avoidance, and that difference is based on zero empirical evidence. Putting a single rocket 200' away is also based on zero empirical evidence (and is probably just based on some arbitrary wire spool length) and carries with it inherent risk as well.

You all are asking for evidence and data before we try to take away the "fun" of drag races. I am telling you that I will gladly provide that data and analysis to you. Are you willing to accept the results and be an advocate for change should I undertake this effort? Are there any other volunteers to do this with me?

I believe this is a topic that needs to be brought up at the next club meeting, as we need to start tracking more statistics on flight failure modes, usually we just track total flights by motor class for the entire launch and post those to our clubs forum, but it would definitely be educational to track the failures and why they failed, along with the relative danger bystanders were put in (ie within 50' or 100' or 1000' of a spectator, did it hit something).

 

[DavidMcCann]

I have an issue with the notion that an activity needs to be justified with a purpose greater than 'it pleases me'.

If you're going to stand next to me and risk my life, you better have a better reason than "but it's gonna look awesome!"

i have an an issue with the notion that if something is fun, there is no need for it to be safe