NAR Rules - Steel BB's for nose cone weight?

eggtimer rocketry
madcow rocketry
Shop deals on ebay
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Pat_B said:
The safety code is really inconsistent between low power and high power. It adds additional distance between spectators and the rockets with high power but that's neglible considering the velocity at which high power rockets can achieve. It's a matter of a second or two that a wayward high power rocket can be over a crowd. Not to mention the difficulty of a large heavy rocket coming in ballistic from an altitude where it isn't initially visible. It's a matter of a second or two between when someone spots it and when it crashes.

Why then can HPR flyers launch bowling balls and we have to worry about a few ounces of BB's??
Click to expand...

Two different games :)
"Well, for one thing, high-power rockets are not simply model rockets with large diameters. And they do have their own safety code, which differs in some respects from the code for model rockets. And bowling ball lofts are conducted in specific places under specific conditions where they will present little to no hazard to the public. And anyone seeking to launch a high power rocket needs to obtain an FAA waiver and meet a number of FAA regulations, which are exempted for anyone seeking to launch a low power model rocket. And in the case of high power rockets, a prohibition of the use of metal or hard composites in their construction would actually make them more hazardous by limiting the ability of such rockets to maintain their structural integrity under the thrust loads of high powered engines. High power rocketry and model rocketry share the same culture and ethic of safety, but neither discipline's safety code can be directly transferred to the other discipline without some modification."
This is from MarkII and sums it up well I think :)
Cheers
fred
 
Fred- none of what you said negates my comments. The waivers really have no bearing on safety with respect to what we are talking about. When it's all said and done the HPR rocket gets launched and no one can guarantee its flight path. I've attended a dozen or so HPR launches over the years and have seen plenty of rockets ending up where they shouldn't. So the HPR code doesn't prevent wayward flights.
 
Pat_B said:
Fred- none of what you said negates my comments. The waivers really have no bearing on safety with respect to what we are talking about. When it's all said and done the HPR rocket gets launched and no one can guarantee its flight path. I've attended a dozen or so HPR launches over the years and have seen plenty of rockets ending up where they shouldn't. So the HPR code doesn't prevent wayward flights.
Click to expand...

I never said it did. Launching rockets will always have some inherant risk as you say. Also some folks feel ball bearings or shot used in certain fashions are fine and they seem like experianced knowledeable flyers as well :) Are you saying HPR safe launch distances are not far enough in your opinion? If you are then that might be a good topic for the HPR forum or another thread in this area :)
Cheers
fred
 
My main point is that so long as HPR rocketry exists in its current fashion then it's senseless to show concern for LPR rockets with respect to small metal parts.
 
Pat_B said:
Fred- none of what you said negates my comments. The waivers really have no bearing on safety with respect to what we are talking about. When it's all said and done the HPR rocket gets launched and no one can guarantee its flight path. I've attended a dozen or so HPR launches over the years and have seen plenty of rockets ending up where they shouldn't. So the HPR code doesn't prevent wayward flights.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm with you Pat... I've seen FAR MORE serious safety incidents at high power launches than model rocket launches. When you consider the additional mass, altitudes, and especially SPEED of HPR rockets, any anomaly in the flight creates a significantly higher hazard than a similar anomaly in a LPR or even MPR rocket. I've seen staging failures on LPR rockets, and I've seen HPR staging failures, but I've never seen a LPR model start 'screaming in' like an artillery shell from a staging failure, unlike HPR models. I've seen accidental ignition of a LPR rocket while a guy was underneath hooking it up, and I've seen an ejection charge go off on a HPR bird while the guy was loading up/setting up the main chute and rocket, and send a foot long pointed nosecone 10-15 feet across from and within a foot behind the guy I was talking to building his reload motor in the next pop-up, and the rocket sock it's owner in the gut hard enough to snap the electronics board off and leave a body tube ring hematoma on his abdomen, and knock the wind out of him so badly he had to be carried to a nearby camper to recooperate. I'd take the mistimed LPR ignition over that ANY day, because had the guy building his reload been sitting a foot back from where he was, or the rocket been pointed a little different, he'd have probably taken the point of a foot long 5 inch-ish nosecone directly to the temple or ear. That would NOT have been a good day by any stretch.

I don't fear HPR or think it's unsafe, but knowing that SPEED KILLS and that HPR rockets are the 18 wheelers of the rocketry world, going NASCAR speeds compared to LPR stuff which are the cars and pickups going highway speeds, I think folks need to have a LOT more respect for it than I sometimes see. As my Dad says, "Even a .22 can kill you" but I'd rather get hit by that than a .357 or 12 guage! Of course, the idea is not to get hit with anything AT ALL...

Common sense and safety are ultimately more important than building materials... OL JR :)
 
We are comparing apples and oranges here;

HPR is highly adult oriented and much more closely
regulated hobby conducted usually in areas closed
(or restricted) from general public whereas
LPR is more youth oriented activity often conducted in
public land, school ballfields or backyards with
stuff bought from your local Wallyworld...

Some prefer one over the other,
some (like myself) don't, its all fun...
 
Pat_B said:
My main point is that so long as HPR rocketry exists in its current fashion then it's senseless to show concern for LPR rockets with respect to small metal parts.
Click to expand...
Pat with all due respect safety is always a concern. If you feel HPR needs improvement is safety thats fine but the situation does not improve by ignoring safety at the LPR level :)
Cheers
fred
 
luke strawwalker said:
Yeah, I'm with you Pat... I've seen FAR MORE serious safety incidents at high power launches than model rocket launches. When you consider the additional mass, altitudes, and especially SPEED of HPR rockets, any anomaly in the flight creates a significantly higher hazard than a similar anomaly in a LPR or even MPR rocket. I've seen staging failures on LPR rockets, and I've seen HPR staging failures, but I've never seen a LPR model start 'screaming in' like an artillery shell from a staging failure, unlike HPR models. I've seen accidental ignition of a LPR rocket while a guy was underneath hooking it up, and I've seen an ejection charge go off on a HPR bird while the guy was loading up/setting up the main chute and rocket, and send a foot long pointed nosecone 10-15 feet across from and within a foot behind the guy I was talking to building his reload motor in the next pop-up, and the rocket sock it's owner in the gut hard enough to snap the electronics board off and leave a body tube ring hematoma on his abdomen, and knock the wind out of him so badly he had to be carried to a nearby camper to recooperate. I'd take the mistimed LPR ignition over that ANY day, because had the guy building his reload been sitting a foot back from where he was, or the rocket been pointed a little different, he'd have probably taken the point of a foot long 5 inch-ish nosecone directly to the temple or ear. That would NOT have been a good day by any stretch.

I don't fear HPR or think it's unsafe, but knowing that SPEED KILLS and that HPR rockets are the 18 wheelers of the rocketry world, going NASCAR speeds compared to LPR stuff which are the cars and pickups going highway speeds, I think folks need to have a LOT more respect for it than I sometimes see. As my Dad says, "Even a .22 can kill you" but I'd rather get hit by that than a .357 or 12 guage! Of course, the idea is not to get hit with anything AT ALL...

Common sense and safety are ultimately more important than building materials... OL JR :)
Click to expand...

Well luke it sounds like another thread :) I dont mind discussions wanderring to a point but this sounds like a valid thread revolving around safety in the HPR arena :)
Cheers
fred
 
roadkill said:
We are comparing apples and oranges here;

HPR is highly adult oriented and much more closely
regulated hobby conducted usually in areas closed
(or restricted) from general public whereas
LPR is more youth oriented activity often conducted in
public land, school ballfields or backyards with
stuff bought from your local Wallyworld...

Some prefer one over the other,
some (like myself) don't, its all fun...
Click to expand...
If you folks want I could start another thread no problem :) Sue I do find your points interesting though :)
Cheers
fred
 
OK, I just read this thread today and I'd like to add my two cents worth based on my experience:

(1.) It doesn't matter what you use for weight in a nose cone if the entire rocket comes in ballistic, it will still have enough energy to punch through sheet metal. I've seen pictures of unweighted BT20 sized rockets that have completely penetrated the roofs of equipment trailers.

(2.) The denser the material used and the further forward it's placed in the nose cone the more likely it is that the nose cone will be aerodynamically stable and will come in ballistic if it separates.

(3.) HPR rockets are so heavy and strongly built that they do not need to come in ballistic to do a lot of damage. A couple of years ago the fin can of a 4" rocket separated from the forward section and trashed the windshield and hood of an SUV at a regional meet in Ohio that I attended.

(4.) If you really don't want to use any metal for nose weight consider using closed cell expanding urethane foam. It can be purchased in formulations weighing 2, 3, 4, 8, or 16 pounds per cubic foot. Calculate the amount of nose weight you need and the volume of your nose cone and purchase the density that will give you the desired weight when it fills the nose cone. Urethane foam can be purchased at:

https://www.uscomposites.com/foam.html



Ken Holloway
NAR #78336, L-II
 

Similar threads

burkefj
Hound Dog Missile
2
Replies
51
Views
3K
burkefj
burkefj
P
LOC 4" Phoenix Payload Bay Options
Replies
18
Views
981
b.wieting
b.wieting
M
BT-55 (ish) plastic nose cone that matches the Estes Patriot (#2056)?
Replies
13
Views
759
86mustang408w
86mustang408w
Back_at_it
Estes Long Ranger Quick Build #0814
Replies
7
Views
282
Back_at_it
Back_at_it
SolarYellow
Bertha/Ranger/etc. & commercial "elliptical" nose cones
Replies
4
Views
356
SolarYellow
SolarYellow

Latest posts

Back
Top