MAC Performance - Black Fly Upscale Survey Poll + Build Thread

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Black Fly Upscale

  • 38mm MMT / 3" diameter

  • 54mm MMT / 4" diameter

  • Both!

  • None, I like my original 29mm Black Fly just fine.


Results are only viewable after voting.
I did have initial concerns, but so far I've seen 2 ground tests and 4 flights with this configuration and they all came out fine. It's a snug fit in the NC, but I think of it like a plastic injection mold with draft angle to promote release. As soon as the chute/nomex move a little, it's definitely coming out (unlike a straight walled payload tube).

I make a longish bundle of the Z-folded kevlar and secure it with one of my wife's hair ties. Since the ground testing I have started I placing the kevlar bundle under the last wrap of the nomex burrito roll, so that probably helps it all come out together. I will document my packing the next time I prepare this rocket (for a K695R).

I considered placing the charge in the nose tip, but this seemed like a PITA and more likely to damage or tangle the wire running up to the ematch. I like the simplicity of wiring ematches directly to the altimeter and didn't want to extend the leads to reach the nose tip.

I've got a ton of experience doing HED deployment. What you've described is similar to what I do. I z-fold the harness and drop it into the tip of the nosecone ahead of the chute bundle. Dozens of flights and they all came out fine.
Friends of mine also prefer to put the charges down in the tip with long charge wires. They've never had problems either, but I find the packing to be troublesome just due to the extra wires dangling.
100 ways to skin this cat...
 
Am I correct in noting that you tested without the brass tip? I will be doing my ground testing in the next couple of weeks and I plan to use the aluminium one for this.

Busted.

Ahem, neither. I ground tested my 4" FiberMax NC and convinced myself the WM NC with metal tip for the Black Fly was the same diameter, coupler engagement, # shear pins, bulkhead charge cups, chute and harness, similar cone volume, etc and didn't warrant additional testing. Hey, it worked! ;)
 
Busted.

Ahem, neither. I ground tested my 4" FiberMax NC and convinced myself the WM NC with metal tip for the Black Fly was the same diameter, coupler engagement, # shear pins, bulkhead charge cups, chute and harness, similar cone volume, etc and didn't warrant additional testing. Hey, it worked! ;)

And I was going to use your numbers lol
 
Here’s how I pack the main in the NC. The kevlar bundle goes in the last wrap of the burrito roll and I cup the roll with the 6" nomex blast deflector.

IMG_6639.jpgIMG_6640.jpg

Video from the 4" Fly's K695R flight yesterday in Hartsel. Really fun flight, super straight. Recovered 1.35 miles away.
 
Last edited:
My 4" Black Fly has flown twice now, and both times the dual RRC3 altimeters are reporting altitudes well over my Open Rocket sims. Both were wonderfully straight, beautiful, nominal flights.

J540R: Expected ~6,000, reported 6,900'
K695R: Expected ~8,000, reported 10,600'

With the K695 flight there are spikes in the velocity data so I wonder if something is funky with my baro ports. They are certainly drilled perpendicular to the tube, the holes are clean, and were sized appropriately based on port calculators. There are 3 holes, a little over 1/8" dia, IIRC I drilled with a #29, 0.136". The #2-56 shear screw heads are 60 degrees offset from the 3 baro ports. I sanded the NC, vent band, booster tubes as pinned to make them as smooth as possible, but there is a little irregularity here where the canvas tubes meet the fiberglass NC.

I fly the exact same HED electronics sled in my AMW Fibermax and see great agreement with sims, and no spikes. Same size/number of baro ports and pins. That has a different NC profile though and even with a K456 hasn't gone *that* fast.

Thoughts on what I should do?
  • Live with it? It still seems to deploy chutes as expected.
  • Would over sizing the baro ports help?
  • Further sand the NC/vent band/booster interface? (ugh)
Unlikely:
  • The thin air at Hartsel (8,800') helped? Ha.
  • That tail cone is slippery!
  • AeroTech had a really potent batch of Redline propellant? ;)

RRC3 data and ORK file attached. Appreciate any advice!

7-7-2018_4inBF_J540R_alt1.png 7-7-2018_4inBF_J540R_alt2.png 7-29-18_K695R_alt1.png 7-29-18_K695R_alt2.png
 

Attachments

  • MAC BlackFly 4.ork
    2.9 KB · Views: 43
Last edited:
That still near the end of the video with your son (im assuming?) is awesome!

Thanks, Justin! Yep, it was a guys weekend with my 4y/o son, George V. Camping, coloring, buffalo bone collecting, and rockets. We're thankful to have awesome clubs and launch sites nearby like Tripoli Colorado in Hartsel.



IMG_6700.JPG IMG_6655.JPG IMG_6676.JPG IMG_6689.JPG
 
My 4" Black Fly has flown twice now, and both times the dual RRC3 altimeters are reporting altitudes well over my Open Rocket sims. Both were wonderfully straight, beautiful, nominal flights.

J540R: Expected ~6,000, reported 6,900'
K695R: Expected ~8,000, reported 10,600'

With the K695 flight there are spikes in the velocity data so I wonder if something is funky with my baro ports. They are certainly drilled perpendicular to the tube, the holes are clean, and were sized appropriately based on port calculators. There are 3 holes, a little over 1/8" dia, IIRC I drilled with a #29, 0.136". The #2-56 shear screw heads are 60 degrees offset from the 3 baro ports. I sanded the NC, vent band, booster tubes as pinned to make them as smooth as possible, but there is a little irregularity here where the canvas tubes meet the fiberglass NC.

I fly the exact same HED electronics sled in my AMW Fibermax and see great agreement with sims, and no spikes. Same size/number of baro ports and pins. That has a different NC profile though and even with a K456 hasn't gone *that* fast.

Thoughts on what I should do?
  • Live with it? It still seems to deploy chutes as expected.
  • Would over sizing the baro ports help?
  • Further sand the NC/vent band/booster interface? (ugh)
Unlikely:
  • The thin air at Hartsel (8,800') helped? Ha.
  • That tail cone is slippery!
  • AeroTech had a really potent batch of Redline propellant? ;)

RRC3 data and ORK file attached. Appreciate any advice!

View attachment 358562 View attachment 358563 View attachment 358564 View attachment 358565

My initial thoughts are that the data is off, although a tailcone can have a relatively positive affect on your max values.

What is causing the data spike could be any one of, or a combination of the factors you mentioned. I also get .125 (1/8) diameter for three sampling holes in that size AV bay, but I would have no issue going up to .1875 (3/16).

Having said that my guess is that the sample hole size is fine and the issue has to do with the location of the holes in relation to the diameter difference between the nosecone and the BT. Those two issues in combination may be playing the biggest role as I am fairly confident that the laminar airflow is broken at that stage and if you were to have the resources to do a CFD analysis there would be much more turbulence around the sampling holes than ideal.

That being said relocating the vent band is not as practical as trying to smooth out the diameter differences, except it means repainting your vent band.
 
In search of a better flame to rocket length ratio I recently flew my 4" 'Fly on an AT L1000W to 12,828' and 1,000 mph. 12.1 lbs on the pad. Heck of a motor!

4in_l1000w.jpg 4in_l1000w-2.jpg prairie.jpg
 
My 4" Black Fly has flown twice now, and both times the dual RRC3 altimeters are reporting altitudes well over my Open Rocket sims. Both were wonderfully straight, beautiful, nominal flights.

J540R: Expected ~6,000, reported 6,900'
K695R: Expected ~8,000, reported 10,600'

With the K695 flight there are spikes in the velocity data so I wonder if something is funky with my baro ports. They are certainly drilled perpendicular to the tube, the holes are clean, and were sized appropriately based on port calculators. There are 3 holes, a little over 1/8" dia, IIRC I drilled with a #29, 0.136". The #2-56 shear screw heads are 60 degrees offset from the 3 baro ports. I sanded the NC, vent band, booster tubes as pinned to make them as smooth as possible, but there is a little irregularity here where the canvas tubes meet the fiberglass NC.

I fly the exact same HED electronics sled in my AMW Fibermax and see great agreement with sims, and no spikes. Same size/number of baro ports and pins. That has a different NC profile though and even with a K456 hasn't gone *that* fast.

Thoughts on what I should do?
  • Live with it? It still seems to deploy chutes as expected.
  • Would over sizing the baro ports help?
  • Further sand the NC/vent band/booster interface? (ugh)
Unlikely:
  • The thin air at Hartsel (8,800') helped? Ha.
  • That tail cone is slippery!
  • AeroTech had a really potent batch of Redline propellant? ;)

RRC3 data and ORK file attached. Appreciate any advice!

View attachment 358562 View attachment 358563 View attachment 358564 View attachment 358565

George how are the altimeter logs since you last launched, still spikes, if not what did you do to mitigate it?
 
George how are the altimeter logs since you last launched, still spikes, if not what did you do to mitigate it?

After drilling the 3 baro ports larger (11/64" dia) and re-aligning the NC/vent band to be as smooth as possible I still had spikes in the velocity data for both RRC3s. Altitude data was much closer to the simulations, and was supported by what I saw on the MW T3 GPS track points. I kind of think AeroTech had an extra hot Redline batch in October 2017 which contributed to outperforming sims. Both those K695R and J540R motors had similar date codes.

By the way, here's the L1000W launch video:


Next flight for this 'Fly will be a K375NW to about the same altitude but slower, whenever A/T 2560 cases are available (pre-ordered since June). I'll likely make the NC/vent/booster transition smoother this winter and repaint.
 

Attachments

  • 10-5-18_4inBF_L1000W.png
    10-5-18_4inBF_L1000W.png
    162.4 KB · Views: 62
After drilling the 3 baro ports larger (11/64" dia) and re-aligning the NC/vent band to be as smooth as possible I still had spikes in the velocity data for both RRC3s. Altitude data was much closer to the simulations, and was supported by what I saw on the MW T3 GPS track points. I kind of think AeroTech had an extra hot Redline batch in October 2017 which contributed to outperforming sims. Both those K695R and J540R motors had similar date codes.

By the way, here's the L1000W launch video:


Next flight for this 'Fly will be a K375NW to about the same altitude but slower, whenever A/T 2560 cases are available (pre-ordered since June). I'll likely make the NC/vent/booster transition smoother this winter and repaint.


Very nice flight. Looks like a bit of weather cocking off the rail but then she didn't mess around and was out of there. Your rocket to flame ratio is getting bigger, I think that flame was about 3 times the length of the rocket!
 
Two Mile Fly! The K1103X took my 4" Black Fly to 10,636' AGL at Mach 1.1. Got this one to go straight up for maximum altitude. Next up the dual thrust 54/2560 K375NW Warp9 to White Lightning.

 
Another 2 Mile Fly video... AeroTech 54/2560 RMS K1275R to 11,753' AGL at Mach 1.2. Incredibly straight boost in moderate winds.

 
Back
Top