Off-the-shelf multi-pad launch controller options?

[JoeG]

I know the Rocket Rev loves to brag about his system he hawks so proudly.
All I can say was it DID NOT WORK WELL at Balls.
I wanted to use my own system, but the Balls staff really wanted to use their [new] FX system.
Well....after three long tries to light my motor, I finally pulled the wires and asked them to fire an e=match which FAILED!!!!
We wasted all of our "camera time" trying to get the system to fire.
Kinda a good thing the rocket failed. If we had made the Karman line without video because of the stupid launch system I would have been really pissed.
Instead, I just know to stay away from that system.....not good IMHO.

The Rev can diss my report, but it is what it is....a failure at Balls for me.

Sounds like you're kind of pissed anyway. I can hear and understand your frustration. I had a project that didn't get in the air due to the winds aloft. Wish I had known about your issue at the time to maybe find the cause then and work through it but to say the system did not work well at BALLS because of one or two failures is like saying you will stay away from launching rockets because your flight failed (your words). A little extreme. I'm sorry the system didn't work for your launch and I'm sorry your flight didn't go as planned.

Overall the system worked well. The batteries were checked every evening after the launch and were recharged as needed. Leads and clips were checked as well. All pad boxes were brought in from the range every day and looked over. At the end of Sunday all batteries were still well over 12 volts under load. The away pad configuration was conceived and built in Ohio, 2200 miles away from the venue they were to operate in. We took them out the day before the launch and put them in the area they were supposed to be operating in and everything worked fine.

What day did you fly? Gerald brought the boxes in on either Friday or Saturday afternoon and asked us to check one of them but didn't say what the problem was. We did change the lead that looked a little crispy and tested it and all three away cell boxes were used the next day without issue I believe.

We worked hard putting together a system that was long range AND portable. With the problems discovered we are working to have those issues resolved for next year.

For the record we had no issues on any pad that was up to 2500 feet away other than operator error. Wrong pad armed, bad igniter, shorted clips or disconnecting the battery at the pad and then forgetting to hook it up again are not system problems. The away pad electronics were moved from launch area to launch area for the convenience of the flyers. Retaining the control of the “button” for the LCO was a safety issue.


Again, sorry that you had to be one of the few.

 

[Steve Shannon]

Sounds like you're kind of pissed anyway. I can hear and understand your frustration. I had a project that didn't get in the air due to the winds aloft. Wish I had known about your issue at the time to maybe find the cause then and work through it but to say the system did not work well at BALLS because of one or two failures is like saying you will stay away from launching rockets because your flight failed (your words). A little extreme. I'm sorry the system didn't work for your launch and I'm sorry your flight didn't go as planned.

Overall the system worked well. The batteries were checked every evening after the launch and were recharged as needed. Leads and clips were checked as well. All pad boxes were brought in from the range every day and looked over. At the end of Sunday all batteries were still well over 12 volts under load. The away pad configuration was conceived and built in Ohio, 2200 miles away from the venue they were to operate in. We took them out the day before the launch and put them in the area they were supposed to be operating in and everything worked fine.

What day did you fly? Gerald brought the boxes in on either Friday or Saturday afternoon and asked us to check one of them but didn't say what the problem was. We did change the lead that looked a little crispy and tested it and all three away cell boxes were used the next day without issue I believe.

We worked hard putting together a system that was long range AND portable. With the problems discovered we are working to have those issues resolved for next year.

For the record we had no issues on any pad that was up to 2500 feet away other than operator error. Wrong pad armed, bad igniter, shorted clips or disconnecting the battery at the pad and then forgetting to hook it up again are not system problems. The away pad electronics were moved from launch area to launch area for the convenience of the flyers. Retaining the control of the “button” for the LCO was a safety issue.


Again, sorry that you had to be one of the few.

Thanks for the information, Joe. And for all the unsung and under appreciated work you did at BALLS to keep everything running.

 

[Cnorm]

I know the Rocket Rev loves to brag about his system he hawks so proudly.
All I can say was it DID NOT WORK WELL at Balls.
I wanted to use my own system, but the Balls staff really wanted to use their [new] FX system.
Well....after three long tries to light my motor, I finally pulled the wires and asked them to fire an e=match which FAILED!!!!
We wasted all of our "camera time" trying to get the system to fire.
Kinda a good thing the rocket failed. If we had made the Karman line without video because of the stupid launch system I would have been really pissed.
Instead, I just know to stay away from that system.....not good IMHO.

The Rev can diss my report, but it is what it is....a failure at Balls for me.

You seem REALLY FUN to hang around, in an UNSTABLE ragey SHOUTY sort of way!!!!

Where's your home field? I'm going to come set-up next to you so I can point and laugh every time you throw a fit doing your "enjoyable" hobby.

 

[RocketRev]

As far what happened at BALLS is concerned, all I can comment on is about what I've heard. And I heard several different things that happened.

1) I heard that the pad was further than a mile away from the LCO table. Dan and I have already been looking into this one and have already sent info to Joe Grubb and the BALLS crew concerning this. There are directional antennas on the market that will extend transmission distances. As far as I know Balls is the only place in the USA that anybody is trying to launch rockets further out than a mile. Fortunately the directional antennas should fix the problem even at Black Rock.

2) The second thing that I heard is that when inspected, the igniter lead that was on the pad that didn't work has some seriously melted insulation. Any shorted igniter lead is going to fail. I don't care how close or how far away the pad is from the controller. I was told that once the shorted igniter lead was replaced the system returned to working just fine. So yeah, a melted insulation igniter lead failed to launch your rocket. That does not mean that the system failed particularly after the fact that once it was replaced the system worked as designed. It is unfortunate that nobody thought to check the igniter lead earlier after the first "failed" ignition. A bad igniter lead is the most easily failed part of any launch system. Yes, the igniter lead is a part of the system, but it is the most easily "broken" and replaced.

3) That some team used their own system and it worked doesn't really mean anything without more information. At what distance were they transmitting? Without knowing the facts, you're talking apples and oranges. The fact that somebody can create a single pad system that works is once again comparing apples and oranges. Would that system have "failed" with a shorted igniter? I can't tell you how many times I've found igniter leads that were left in the "blast radius" of motors only to get shorted across because of melted insulation.

Diagnosing a failure in a system does require information. Sorry nobody thought to check the igniter lead earlier, but hey, hindsight is perfect.

Brad

 

[UhClem]

The away pad electronics were moved from launch area to launch area for the convenience of the flyers. Retaining the control of the “button” for the LCO was a safety issue.

Was operation of the launch system verified after each move? If not, how did you know it had been set up correctly? What was the signal margin? Is it even possible to view RSSI data? If not, then you should test the link at twice the maximum expected distance just to provide some margin.

Did you send the launch key out to the pad while they connected the igniter to the launch control system? If not, then you were worried about control rather than safety. Control that you could have achieved simply by holding the launch key from the flyers system until it was time to launch.

 

[JoeG]

I will try to answer all your questions in order.

The away pads were single pad boxes with one igniter lead. The wireless is integral to the box. Everything was mounted on a tripod including the battery and nothing was disconnected. The whole thing doesn't weigh ten pounds. You literally pick up the tripod and put it where you want it. hook up the igniter at the proper time and check continuity. When you are finished with it you return it to the away cell RSO and the next person picks it up.

Not sure how much margin we had but for where everyone was supposed to set up we were good on Thursday. Did everyone set up where they were supposed to? I don't know. Would the signal be blocked by a launch tower in between it and the LCO? I really don't know.As Brad has said we are working on fixes to make things better just in case it was a signal problem but I'm not sure it was. I would like to do some extensive testing this summer. This system has worked well under extreme cold and heat and at any distance we have attempted prior to this launch so we had no reason to doubt it would perform as usual. I doubt the Brad and Dan had these conditions in mind when they spawned the idea of their first launch system many years ago.

Signal strength indicators in the form of LED's are on every pad box and the signal is measured by the number of led's that are lit. This can be read at the pad and at the LCO station. Once again that would have been good info to have at the time but Bill, Gary, or I were not out at the pad then and didn't even know there was a problem until afterwards. We may have been retreiving a rocket. Flying rockets is why we went.

We did not send the launch key out for any number reasons. The biggest being we were launching other rockets. The range was set up so that the left side could launch while the right side was loading and vice versa and anyone could launch while the away cells were loading. Some of the away cells took all day to prep. I have never been to a high power launch where someone gave me the key to the system while I was loading. I would not want to face the wrath of Rocketeers going all the way to Black Rock and wanting to launch their K, L , or M motors and not being allowed to because someone was prepping a Q motor a mile away.

You are correct. I'm told there was concern about safety due to some past experiences and the best way to better insure safety was with control in one place. Control for the sake of safety.

 

[UhClem]

I have never been to a high power launch where someone gave me the key to the system while I was loading. I would not want to face the wrath of Rocketeers going all the way to Black Rock and wanting to launch their K, L , or M motors and not being allowed to because someone was prepping a Q motor a mile away.

What I am hearing is that one control system was used for everything. Were you launching rockets while someone was connecting their igniter up out at the away cell? I don't trust anyone to always select the correct pad that much. Even with much smaller motors.

My experience with the launch inhibit key being sent to the pad chief during final arming (connecting igniter to launcher cables) was the M270 launcher and the ATACMS at WSMR. Even though you would think that the crew in the cab wouldn't do anything stupid.

Somewhere between an Estes BP motor and the ATACMS is a line where you really need to worry about safety in a paranoid sort of way. I don't know exactly where that line is but a Q motor probably qualifies.

Why not have a dedicated wireless system just for the away cell(s)? That way you can be certain no one will push the button and you don't hold up other more pedestrian launches.

 

[mikec]

When I've gone to BALLS I've always taken my own away pad launch system. Sounds like I will continue to do so, assuming it's still allowed.

 

[JoeG]

What I am hearing is that one control system was used for everything. Were you launching rockets while someone was connecting their igniter up out at the away cell? I don't trust anyone to always select the correct pad that much. Even with much smaller motors.

Yes. This is done at all the Big launches I have attended for several years. BALLS, AirFest, LDRS, URRF, MidWest Power and probably others. A lot of them use one launch system for all launches. How would you do it and still get a couple of hundred launches a day? If there is a better way I would like to know. We could use the help. Note that if more than one bank of pads is turned on on the Wilson system you can not launch anything. The system is designed that way. Also when a pad bank is armed it emits a loud warning. If you are really worried you can disconnect the battery at the pad while hooking up the igniter but occasionally someone will forget to reconnect it when they are done. I would prefer that you touch the clips together anyway and leave the battery connected. If there is a spark you know there is a problem. If you disconnect the battery and hook up the igniter you have no idea if a relay is fried or there is power to the pad until you hook the battery back up and then it's too late. Then you could get a real close up view of the launch. I'll bet an N at 25 feet is a sight to behold.

My experience with the launch inhibit key being sent to the pad chief during final arming (connecting igniter to launcher cables) was the M270 launcher and the ATACMS at WSMR. Even though you would think that the crew in the cab wouldn't do anything stupid.

That seems quite doable considering the proximity of the crew to the rocket and the fact that they have a separate launch system for each vehicle and people for each task independent of the other launchers. It would be difficult to deliver the missile in a timely manner if the crew were further apart as we are at a rocket launch. By the way, I'm a veteran and I've seen lots of military personnel do stupid stuff.

Somewhere between an Estes BP motor and the ATACMS is a line where you really need to worry about safety in a paranoid sort of way. I don't know exactly where that line is but a Q motor probably qualifies.

Why not have a dedicated wireless system just for the away cell(s)? That way you can be certain no one will push the button and you don't hold up other more pedestrian launches.

Good question. We do worry about safety at every rocket launch. At BALLS the majority of the more pedestrian launches are L's & M's. The closest pad is 500 feet away.

It still seems more safe to me if you only have to keep track of one person pushing buttons than having each person pushing their own button.

Thanks for the suggestions I'm sure we will consider them.

 

[Faroutspacenut]

Follow up: I got my Pratt Hobbies 6 Pack launch controller. It seems well built for the price and should suit my needs perfectly. Will let everyone know how it works in the field.

They were great to deal with - very helpful and responsive to my questions.