AeroTech Open Thread

[loopy]

Sharon's flight took place on November 9th, 2013. That 3" 9 lb. Blackstar flew to 7288 ft. She has made 29 flights on that rocket.
Five flights on K540's and they all went well over 7000 ft. We started buying the K456 in 2013 at Wildmans black saturday sale and she has never flown it in that rocket.
Believe what you will.

It is kinda weird...black smoke and bright sparks like a K456DM in that picture. Metalstorm usually has a very long flame and white smoke. Oh well. I'm also a big fan of Metalstorm, personally, and love the K540M! Planning that motor for the first flight of my Sub-Lime!

 

[Jay Dub 4009]

Agreed k540m is awesome

 

[Rocketjunkie]

Metalstorm is to replicate the Rocketflite Silver Streak, a BP motor with titanium. Aerotech originally called the Skidmark type propellant Metalstorm Dark Matter but most usually just call them Dark Matter. US Rockets came out with the original, IIRC, in 1990 and called them Fire starters. This rocket is on Silver Streaks. (5 stage rack rocket on G160s.)

 

[jmasterj]

@AeroTech Any news on K1800 availability? I'm trying to plan a Black Friday order and I'd love to put that on the list.

 

[Jay Dub 4009]

@AeroTech Any news on K1800 availability? I'm trying to plan a Black Friday order and I'd love to put that on the list.

This times 100000

 

[AeroTech]

@AeroTech Any news on K1800 availability? I'm trying to plan a Black Friday order and I'd love to put that on the list.

I’ll look into it next week.

 

[AeroTech]

We had a successful test of our redesigned O5280X motor today, using an all-fiberglass motor case with no liner, similar to the configuration of the L1000W and most of the other 29, 38 and 54mm DMS motors. No issues with the casing or nozzle at all. Next step is design verification testing by TMT.

 

[jimzcatz]

We had a successful test of our redesigned O5280X motor today, using an all-fiberglass motor case with no liner, similar to the configuration of the L1000W and most of the other 54mm DMS motors. No issues with the casing or nozzle at all. Next step is design verification testing by TMT.
View attachment 546262
View attachment 546263
View attachment 546264
View attachment 546265
View attachment 546266

Ooohhhh, that's going to be a fun test day!

 

[emckee]

We had a successful test of our redesigned O5280X motor today, using an all-fiberglass motor case with no liner, similar to the configuration of the L1000W and most of the other 54mm DMS motors. No issues with the casing or nozzle at all. Next step is design verification testing by TMT.
View attachment 546262
View attachment 546263
View attachment 546264
View attachment 546265
View attachment 546266

No liner means more space for propellant, right? Right?

 

[Theory]

No liner means more space for propellant, right? Right?

My thought exactly!!

Thinking G138 here

 

[Neutronium95]

No liner means more space for propellant, right? Right?

I checked, and this actually has a tad less impulse than the existing file on Thrustcurve. I bet they made a thicker case with the same ID as the liner used in the previous design.

 

[AeroTech]

No liner means more space for propellant, right? Right?

Unfortunately no. The I.D. is the same as the liner so it’s a thicker case.

 

[AeroTech]

I checked, and this actually has a tad less impulse than the existing file on Thrustcurve. I bet they made a thicker case with the same ID as the liner used in the previous design.

The difference is normal variation because the propellant and nozzle are the same.

 

[AeroTech]

O5280X assembly video:

 

[SDramstad]

O5280X assembly video:

Is there a price tag on it yet?

 

[COrocket]

Is there a price tag on it yet?

https://aerotech-rocketry.com/products/product_4c93a519-31ea-f9ec-966f-3aa3f40c0efa
It’s currently listed on Aerotechs website for $2,755.99

 

[smstachwick]

So who’s volunteering to buy me one?

 

[dhbarr]

So who’s volunteering to buy me one?

Just the one?

 

[SDramstad]

3x cluster.

 

[DigBaddy]

3x cluster.

For the first stage, right?

 

[boatgeek]

For the first stage, right?

Yep, then a 4-motor rack rocket.

 

[4regt4]

Using the "Hobbyline" casings - 24/40 and 29/40-120. If the delay grain/insulator is a loose fit, should it be shimmed up a bit with tape? I'm concerned about "blow-by" of the main propulsion flame past the delay grain. But I suppose that's what the forward most O-ring is for....

Hans.

 

[Handeman]

Using the "Hobbyline" casings - 24/40 and 29/40-120. If the delay grain/insulator is a loose fit, should it be shimmed up a bit with tape? I'm concerned about "blow-by" of the main propulsion flame past the delay grain. But I suppose that's what the forward most O-ring is for....

Hans.

I used two new Hobbylines in a cluster and both had loose delay grain/insulators. The both fell out if the fwd closure was turned over. Both failed and burned through the delay hole and lit the powder almost immediately.

Totally agree about shimming them with a wrap of 3/4 masking tape. That prevented any more problems with that batch of reloads for me.

 

[AeroTech]

I used two new Hobbylines in a cluster and both had loose delay grain/insulators. The both fell out if the fwd closure was turned over. Both failed and burned through the delay hole and lit the powder almost immediately.

Totally agree about shimming them with a wrap of 3/4 masking tape. That prevented any more problems with that batch of reloads for me.

The delay is sealed with the O-ring, not with a snug fit or with masking tape. The apparent correlation may have been a coincidence.

 

[Handeman]

The delay is sealed with the O-ring, not with a snug fit or with masking tape. The apparent correlation may have been a coincidence.

Both motors were brand new from the same batch and both failed exactly the same way at the same time. My thought on the failure was that the extremely loose fit allowed the delay liner to tilt in the forward closure, or shift off center enough, that it didn't have a good seal against the o-ring. I used a wrap of masking tape completely around the delay grain after that and they were still not overly tight in the forward closures, but none of the loose delays ever failed after that.

I sent photos of the two motors and got two new reloads and 2 new forward closures from warranty so it's all good.

 

[AeroTech]

We're announcing availability of the 24mm x 95mm E35W Q-Jets today!

 

[bad_idea]

We're announcing availability of the 24mm x 95mm E35W Q-Jets today!

I am excited for this motor and have been awaiting it eagerly. A no-HAZMAT full E with good thrust for moderately chunky mid-power birds and available long delays for light ones, at $12.50/motor MSRP, all without risking a reload case on troublesome fields. Seems like a killer combination to me.

 

[rcktnut]

I used two new Hobbylines in a cluster and both had loose delay grain/insulators. The both fell out if the fwd closure was turned over. Both failed and burned through the delay hole and lit the powder almost immediately.

Totally agree about shimming them with a wrap of 3/4 masking tape. That prevented any more problems with that batch of reloads for me.

The delay is sealed with the O-ring, not with a snug fit or with masking tape. The apparent correlation may have been a coincidence.

Last year a friend had a G64 that fired the ejection charge right after ignition. I asked if he remembered whether the delay insulator was loose in the well or not. He did remember that it was very loose. I told him about the tape method to tighten the delay insulator up. I ran into some very loose insulators also but thanks to a thread on here a couple years ago about the situation I learned to use the tape method. Never had a problem. I know Handeman posted to that thread as well as myself will try to "dig" it up.
Found it/ one of them, man how time flies: https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/at-29-40-120-early-deployment-issue.136925/#post-1632289

One would think that the O-ring would seal the gasses with a loose fitting delay insulator but apparently it is not.

 

[waltr]

Last year a friend had a G64 that fired the ejection charge right after ignition. I asked if he remembered whether the delay insulator was loose in the well or not. He did remember that it was very loose. I told him about the tape method to tighten the delay insulator up. I ran into some very loose insulators also but thanks to a thread on here a couple years ago about the situation I learned to use the tape method. Never had a problem. I know Handeman posted to that thread as well as myself will try to "dig" it up.
Found it/ one of them, man how time flies: https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/at-29-40-120-early-deployment-issue.136925/#post-1632289

One would think that the O-ring would seal the gasses with a loose fitting delay insulator but apparently it is not.

I can see that if the delay element with it's liner (you did remember to insert the delay into the liner?) is very loose, the delay element could move to one side and then NOT seat on the O-ring all the way around.
Then no seal and blow-by to the ejection charge.
I have not seen a loose delay. All have been a nice slip fit into the fwd closure.

 

[Banzai88]

Is there a consolidated list somewhere of which motors use a medusa nozzle?

(Backstory.....someone went and put together a 54mm J315 and a 54mm J1299 several weeks ago (both 554/852 cases), and the launch was scrubbed due to weather.....and the labels aren't clear. So, one has a medusa nozzle, one a conventional nozzle.....which is which?)