Which stability method do you prefer?

[apogee]

What is the underlying math used by VCP? Is it relying on Barrowman or another method? RockSIM offers Barrowman and it's own method - I think the discussion in this case was geared to the math accuracy not the tool per say.

The "RockSim" method is the Barrowman method with a couple of differences. First, it removes all the simplifying assumptions that Jim Barrowman had to make in the 1960's. Back then, you didn't have a personal computer and you had to do all the math on a piece of paper. The assumptions allowed the equations to be simplified so they could be done quicker.

The second difference is the calculations for free-form fins in RockSim. The Barrowman Equations limited fins to simple trapazoidal and elliptical shapes.

 

[spacecadet]

...when the lead on an Estes Electron beam firing box isn't really quite long enough. Drop and run.
And wear a hat.

 

[11bravo]

I prefer a launch pad 200' away and a pile of sandbags!

I use T.L.A.R. - That Looks About Right

I'm with Al and Jon.
Big motor and see what happens.
Although, Al, instead of sandbags, it's just as easy to have young children or small adults to throw in the way if a rocket starts coming towards you. :surprised:
Green Arrow usually has 2 or 3 on hand.
Of course, before I rely on this surefire method, I see what RockSim has to say.

 

[rstaff3]

I prefer a launch pad 200' away and a pile of sandbags!
(Actually I use RocSim)

Yeehaw! Like minds... irate:

Lets see...on all 'regular' rockets I use RockSim's (non-Barrowman) method; on a few that are pushing the envelope, I go conservative with the Rsim/Barrowman numbers; on those I can't code in Rocksim, I swing test; if all of the above fail, I use numbers from a cut-out that Micromeister did. :rotflol:

I have flow some odd ones that defied all analysis...move to the 'C' row of pads!