200K 2 stage flight

Onebadhawk
Shop deals on ebay
the rocketry show
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
jderimig said:
Also, other than a "statement" of altitude has any actual DATA been submitted to the TRA records committee for peer review?
Click to expand...
Given that the claim was "over 200K" and the altitude in the video was estimated, I would suspect that F=ma was involved in the development of the estimate. I believe that the records list now is more of a listing of "high flights" rather than records, as the rules are not being enforced, so I would say report whatever you can make a good case for, particularly if GPS doesn't work.

Jim
 
Curt did not want to submit the rocket for a record or share data. I spoke with James Dougherty on this. He definitely made it above 200k and I’m sure his 244k from the inertial electronics was within 10% of the actual altitude. From what I heard he lost the first stage (not sure what happened there) and the second stage came back with a cracked fin.

In terms of record rules Jim Jarvis is correct. Certification attempt rules for records are no longer enforced which I think is unfortunate. It’s challenging to fly something above 100k but it’s even harder to recover it within the parameters that would be acceptable for a level certification (ie no damage, reasonable recovery speeds < 30 ft/s, within waiver, etc).

It would be cool to keep a log of highest flights (sometimes they don’t work perfectly but still are big achievements) and those that met the requirements for records.
 
Last edited:
Kip_Daugirdas said:
Curt did not want to submit the rocket for a record or share data. I spoke with James Dougherty on this. He definitely made it above 200k and I’m sure his 244k from the inertial electronics was within 10% of the actual altitude. From what I heard he lost the first stage (not sure what happened there) and the second stage came back with a cracked fin.

In terms of record rules Jim Jarvis is correct. Certification attempt rules for records are no longer enforced which I think is unfortunate. It’s challenging to fly something above 100k but it’s even harder to recover it within the parameters that would be acceptable for a level certification (ie no damage, reasonable recovery speeds < 30 ft/s, within waiver, etc).

It would be cool to keep a log of highest flights (sometimes they don’t work perfectly but still are big achievements) and those that met the requirements for records.
Click to expand...

So, it is a record, but not the official record?
 
I have a little minor frustration with people claiming great achievements while not sharing data for others to corroborate their claims with an independent analysis. I believe Curt went very high, but his claim is tarnished a bit for me.

Another example Ky......
 
Kip_Daugirdas said:
Curt did not want to submit the rocket for a record or share data. I spoke with James Dougherty on this. He definitely made it above 200k and I’m sure his 244k from the inertial electronics was within 10% of the actual altitude. From what I heard he lost the first stage (not sure what happened there) and the second stage came back with a cracked fin.

In terms of record rules Jim Jarvis is correct. Certification attempt rules for records are no longer enforced which I think is unfortunate. It’s challenging to fly something above 100k but it’s even harder to recover it within the parameters that would be acceptable for a level certification (ie no damage, reasonable recovery speeds < 30 ft/s, within waiver, etc).

It would be cool to keep a log of highest flights (sometimes they don’t work perfectly but still are big achievements) and those that met the requirements for records.
Click to expand...

I agree that it seems definitive that he made it well above 200k. That alone is a stupendous accomplishment. The video footage is mind numbing. I was just a bit confused that his estimate was down to the foot, which, well, seemed a bit 'on the nose' for an estimate. From my perspective I would have rounded down, knocked 4k' off it for Black Rock AGL, and called it 240k. Seems a bit more of a defensible estimate imo. Of course that's all conjecture as I've not seen any data.

As to the certification attempt rules, I must say I'm quite surprised that Tripoli no longer enforces the rules for altitude attempts. That said I don't have any skin in that game so it doesn't readily concern me. I can say that down here with the AMRS we have a pretty stringent process for record certification that is followed to the letter. It's inflexible but it does take any "interpretation" out of the process which imo is good for all involved.
 
plugger said:
As to the certification attempt rules, I must say I'm quite surprised that Tripoli no longer enforces the rules for altitude attempts. That said I don't have any skin in that game so it doesn't readily concern me. I can say that down here with the AMRS we have a pretty stringent process for record certification that is followed to the letter. It's inflexible but it does take any "interpretation" out of the process which imo is good for all involved.
Click to expand...

Yes I was too. But once you start down that path it’s hard to turn back, i.e. take flyers’ previous records away or determine which ones to keep/remove.
Requirements do keep the rockets on a level playing field and provide a basis for comparison. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to remove a main chute add it back as nose-weight; chop several inches of airframe off and gain an additional 10k in altitude....
 
Kip_Daugirdas said:
Yes I was too. But once you start down that path it’s hard to turn back, i.e. take flyers’ previous records away or determine which ones to keep/remove.
Click to expand...

Well if that's the case they're missing a lot of Adrian Adamson's flights that they previously didn't recognise when he was flying out of Colorado! I guess I find it curious because IIRC Adrian wasn't granted records for what I considered dubious reasons.

F10 to 7492 that I submitted for a Tripoli record. With witness signatures, etc. This forum post also discusses previous attempts, designs, and results:
https://www.rocketryforumarchive.com/...ad.php?t=46394

Data from a G flight over 8200 feet:
https://www.rocketryplanet.com/forums...?t=1999&page=7

Data and discussion of subsequent G flight over 8700 feet that I submitted for a Tripoli record. It had witness signatures, etc.:
https://www.rocketryplanet.com/forums...ead.php?t=2565

H160 to 14,264 in May this year:
https://www.rocketryplanet.com/forums...?t=5667&page=7

H160 to 14,818 in July this year, With witness signatures, etc.:
https://www.tripoli.org/Membership/Co...2/Default.aspx

I600 to 15,965 feet:
https://www.rocketryplanet.com/forums...?t=2808&page=9

I600 to 16,539 according to a HiAlt45k (the only time I have used a non-Featherweight altimeter for a record shot)
https://www.rocketryplanet.com/forums...t=2808&page=16

I216 to 17,408 feet: (With witness signatures, etc.)
https://www.rocketryplanet.com/forums...ead.php?t=6636

J530 to 22,530 (With witness signatures, etc.)
https://www.rocketryplanet.com/forums...ead.php?t=6650

Those I and J flights were in the same weekend, and I think are the 2 that are least likely to be broken without a motor improvement.

L1115 to 32,030 (GPS) a couple of weeks ago (With witness signatures, etc.):
https://www.rocketryforum.com/showthr...t=26383&page=7

I think I have all the downloaded data files from these flights, unless I lost some of the older ones in a computer crash.

I was kind of surprised to see how many record attempts I have made over the last few years. F,G,H,I,J, and L. No K record attempt yet. Next year the M record.

I think most of the above are already on your list. They're all legit. So are the ones from Chad Moore, John Wilke and Warren Musselman. Don't forget that these were launched from either 5400' (Pawnee North Site) or 8800' (Hartsel) ASL. That definitely helps. So does optimal mass, Von Karman skinny nosecones, thin carbon fiber fins, flush or tapered aft closures, and last but not least, shorter rockets by using small av-bays stuffed with small electronics.
Click to expand...
 
"Given that the claim was "over 200K" and the altitude in the video was estimated, I would suspect that F=ma was involved in the development of the estimate. I believe that the records list now is more of a listing of "high flights" rather than records, as the rules are not being enforced, so I would say report whatever you can make a good case for, particularly if GPS doesn't work."


Can you point to a record that did not adhere to rules or meet certification requirements? IIRC for the recent N record, which the build thread was posted here, the flyer dropped it like a rock, but it was his L3 flight as well, so assume you are referring to a different record.
 
Last edited:
BF Rockets said:
"Given that the claim was "over 200K" and the altitude in the video was estimated, I would suspect that F=ma was involved in the development of the estimate. I believe that the records list now is more of a listing of "high flights" rather than records, as the rules are not being enforced, so I would say report whatever you can make a good case for, particularly if GPS doesn't work."


Can you point to a record that did not adhere to rules or meet certification requirements? IIRC for the recent N record, which the build thread was posted here, the flyer dropped it like a rock, but it was his L3 flight as well, so assume you are referring to a different record.
Click to expand...
Yes, I can, but that will be another thread for another day. This thread is about a great flight, which I didn't realize had a few issues. That's too bad.

Jim
 
Last edited:
jderimig said:
Mea Culpa, I actually commented on that thread. Data was provided, 11 years after the claim.
Click to expand...

The release of the data was much delayed. There were some issues with the full FAA flight report containing proprietary data, as UP Aerospace was founded a few years later. That caused the early delays in releasing the data. Later I got very busy with work (Orion Pad Abort - 1 and the upcoming Ascent Abort - 2) and RASAero II development.


Charles E. (Chuck) Rogers
 
How are official altitude measurements even made? Are you required to include a sensor in the flight and then return it for verification?

/I'm new to the hobby
 
You have to fly an approved altimeter. If you’re flying over 30k’ it has to be a GPS altimeter and you have to turn over your flight logs.


Chad said:
How are official altitude measurements even made? Are you required to include a sensor in the flight and then return it for verification?

/I'm new to the hobby
Click to expand...
 
If someone was really serious about wanting some accurate GPS data for the over 100k flights they could always fork out the $5k and get an unlocked GPS unit... Though it makes it quite a bit more painful if you don't get your sustainer back in one piece.

Though a more serious suggestion and something that was done on a launch from my old university quite a while ago. Was to get a GPS receiver that would pass through the raw GPS data, and then you send that to the ground, or even just store them. Then you can do the computations on the ground and get around the whole limitation issue. It gets around the legal issues since only the vehicle itself isn't allowed to know where it is in real time. Would make the hardware cost a lot less expensive than an unlocked GPS.

Amazing work on the flight Curt!
 
Xrain said:
Though a more serious suggestion and something that was done on a launch from my old university quite a while ago. Was to get a GPS receiver that would pass through the raw GPS data, and then you send that to the ground, or even just store them. Then you can do the computations on the ground and get around the whole limitation issue. It gets around the legal issues since only the vehicle itself isn't allowed to know where it is in real time. Would make the hardware cost a lot less expensive than an unlocked GPS.
Click to expand...

Fascinating. Does your university have anything published about this process?
 
RocketPro said:
Curt did have the data independently evaluated. I will let him comment further but it supports the >200K claim easily.
Click to expand...

Out of curiosity, how did Curt handle his sustainer apogee event? Or if he's unwilling to share that could someone confirm what altimeter he used for the sustainer to handle deployment duties for apogee?
 
tfish said:
some info on Curt's build and flight...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/yt96uakns0doslh/Fall 2018.pdf?dl=0

Tony
Click to expand...

Great write up, thanks for sharing that.

You can see clearly in one of the photos the many layers of prepreg on the fin can. The process he devised for the accurate cutting and placement of those parts is a testament to his extreme attention to detail. If you’re not using Mylar pattens and a jeweler’s loupe you’ve got some catching up to do!

Oh by the way, the tube tapers from the aft end forward. And the fin roots and tube are mortised and tenoned. Blows my mind.

There’s still a ton of that prepreg in my freezer. Maybe it’s still good?
 
Thanks for sharing Tony, that report answers a lot of questions I had regarding Curt's flight!

I must admit this really made me chuckle...

Want to fly a rocket to 244k’?
Be prepared to make it your full
time job for several years and
invest significant other
resources as well.
Click to expand...
 
tfish said:
some info on Curt's build and flight...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/yt96uakns0doslh/Fall 2018.pdf?dl=0

Tony
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting the newletter Tony. It's good to see a little more information on how the flight was done.

Looking at the method used to estimate apogee, the calculation depends on a determination of the correct apogee time. Is there any information on how this was determined? Based on my own simulation of this flight, I do not see how it is possible to get to 244K feet in 125 seconds (it takes about 135 seconds). I suspect that the rocket was separated at 125 seconds, based on time or inertial apogee, but that it continued to drift upwards for a short time before actual apogee was reached (much like what happened in my 175K flight). Accounting for that, I would calculate apogee somewhere in the range of 225K to 230K. Not too shabby. Perhaps at some point, Curt will post a simulation of the flight that matches his timing. I'd love to see that. The whole rocket, less the motors, couldn't have weighed more than 7 or 8 pounds. Remarkable.

Also, it appears to me that the booster had no recovery system. I know the booster was not recovered, but is this the reason why? Just for future reference, how did this flight go about being approved by the BOD?

Jim
 
Last edited:
Xrain said:
Was to get a GPS receiver that would pass through the raw GPS data, and then you send that to the ground, or even just store them.
Click to expand...

Can you share which receiver was used for this? The Ublox chipsets that support RTK seem to turn off their UART after 50K meters. Internally they are still calculating fixes but do not transmit ANYTHING on the UART when the COCOM limits are hit (AFAIK).
 
JimJarvis50 said:
Also, it appears to me that the booster had no recovery system. I know the booster was not recovered, but is this the reason why? Just for future reference, how did this flight go about being approved by the BOD?

Jim
Click to expand...

There’s a cone on the top of the booster that fits into the into the expanded nozzle of the sustainer. You can see it in the picture of him arming the booster electronics. There’s a 55” cross form parachute and electronics in there.
 

Similar threads

Astre
2 Stage Rocket using RocketPy
Replies
1
Views
281
thzero
T
OzHybrid
  • Poll
Minnie Maag 2 stage under 1500gms
Replies
9
Views
473
OzHybrid
OzHybrid
Art Upton
Sold Screemin' Mimi & 2 Stage Renegade OOP Combo
Replies
2
Views
124
Art Upton
Art Upton
AidanY
2 Stage I to G flight
Replies
17
Views
2K
AidanY
AidanY
N
Premature Drogue Chute Deployment Diagnosis
Replies
7
Views
294
cwbullet
cwbullet

Latest posts

Back
Top