Why land fins first?

[sed6]

On an HPR the nose or front half can be a significant percent of the total rocket weight under canopy. If the nose cone touches down first, that weight is removed and the fin can slows even more before it touches down, perhaps gently, not busting fins. Why not land nose first?

 

[OverTheTop]

You can choose to fly that way. With the aft section grounding first the NC has a softer landing which may be better for electronics or the NC tip. It is very much the choice of the flyer.

 

[OzHybrid]

The rear contains the strongest part of the rocket, the motor case and the motor mount.
Generally in a dual deploy, the main comes out the top. You want the nosecone to eject and then pull the laundry out. If the harness for the nosecone was really tong to the main, you might not have sufficient energy left once the harness deployed to pull the washing out. That would be bad.
But like all these things, test what you're going to do, and do what you test. There is no written-in-stone method.

 

[JohnCoker]

I think the most common reason is that the aft end is (a lot) heavier and if it lands on the forward end, it's going to damage it.

 

[lakeroadster]

"Rear Eject".... it's a thing...

​

 

[Spacedog49Krell]

Each recovery method has its own Pros and Cons. I found rear ejection and deployment systems to be more complex in design and construction. Fin damage issues were reduced with NC first recovery, but not eliminated.

All of my rockets fly with an electronic payload. Recovery of the data from the experiments is my primary concern. For those flying scale models and ornate rockets, low damage recovery is their concern.

 

[sed6]

"Rear Eject".... it's a thing...


View attachment 604850

That is a stout looking rocket!