An "R"-powered rocket build

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks for the background. Given that number of involved parties and level of infrastructure / organisation, it sounds like you'll definitely have enough people to keep the project going. Good luck!

Tim,

One of the main problems is that we are spread out, all over the country, with some located outside the USA . . .

Coordinating our "engineering" efforts was easy, over the internet, but to bring it all together, physically, would be a logistical nightmare.

Dave F.
 
Last edited:
Moral of the story?

Big projects are *hard*. There's a tremendous amount of planning that's required for them to be successful, and building the rocket is, to be honest, one of the easier parts.

-Kevin

^^^truth^^^
 
  • Like
Reactions: ben
Moral of the story?

Big projects are *hard*. There's a tremendous amount of planning that's required for them to be successful, and building the rocket is, to be honest, one of the easier parts.

-Kevin

It wasn’t the challenge that stopped me. Everything was pretty much in place including the motor, the launch platform, the paperwork and the venue.

It’s purely financial. The need for a large excavator and a bulldozer is going to tax any available funds for at least 2-3 years.

Of course if what we found at bedrock continues things should go quite well.

I don’t want the story to be that I faced enough obstacles to stop. Not even close. Priorities change and there’s no way to work on 2 big projects at the same time.

Chuck C.
 
Your paperwork is DONE?
Really -- why not post the required sims then???

+1 million Kevin

Fred you’re that 1% I’m going to have to choose to ignore lol.

I only give myself a “C” on my C3RC applications for LDRS and BALLS. The next one would have been an “A” thanks to some VERY sharp guys on the C3RC.

However that is going to be my last response to your negativity moving forward. I don’t understand the continued anger? 99% of the guys on here are great people and have provided a wealth of information to this project.

Take care my man.

Chuck C.
 
Moral of the story?

Big projects are *hard*. There's a tremendous amount of planning that's required for them to be successful, and building the rocket is, to be honest, one of the easier parts.

-Kevin

So insightful and so very true.

Not just planning but you really have to have the right group of people participating as well. I've worked on a couple of very large projects and yeah...either I am not cut out for that stuff or I haven't found the right group. Now SLI on the other hand....
 
Chuck -- a C is a "passing grade."
Not quite the back story I heard - that said you didn't pass.
Plus you clearly didn't file in time.
Remember the C-3 community isn't that large.

So just pushing the buttons on somebody's who, shall I say, has been a little less than 100% honest in this long post and lead several people down a garden path...…

Enough of the BS.....go hunt gold and have fun!
Hope somebody picks up your stuff and puts it to good use.
It would be nice to see the rocket fly.

Best of luck.

Fred,
I doubt that our C3RC analysts blabbed to you about another flyer’s submission. The ones I know would not be so unprofessional. In any case what you’re doing now comes off as petty and mean.
 
My C3RC paperwork for LDRS and BALLS shows a date well before the 90-day cutoff.

Hard to tell fibs when I’ve been nothing but transparent AND there’s pictures lol!

Again most everyone here has been wonderful. What a great group of guys! Trust me I don’t like halting something so close. But who knows what the future holds.

I’ve chosen to try and ignore the negativity. Not easy at times but it’s the right course of action.

Thanks!

Chuck C.
 
Again most everyone here has been wonderful. What a great group of guys! Trust me I don’t like halting something so close. But who knows what the future holds.

Chuck C.

Chuck,

It was a real pleasure and a distinct honor to work with you and all of the other contributors to your project. I have no regrets and harbor no resentment, whatsoever.

When you return to Rocketry, and I hope you will, I would be proud and eager to work together with you, on future projects, anytime, sir.

Stay safe out there in the desert, seriously . . . Some of the "rattlesnakes" walk on two legs, especially where "untraceable money" is ripe for the picking !

Dave F.

STEELY-EYED MISSILE MEN - AVATAR.jpg
 
I found this project thread interesting and it was an opportunity to think about some fun problems for a while, however its ultimate failure as a project is both a disappointment because of all the effort expended by many people in good faith coming to naught, and I would claim a demonstration of what can happen when one over reaches, whether it is an L3 'kit rocket' or an R 'kit rocket'.

Fred's criticisms may be heard as aggressive, yet there are legitimate criticisms of how this project was carried out that there seems to be a knee jerk reaction against. There is a reason [probably several] why all the material products of this effort are for sale rather than getting flown. I observe that many are inclined to put a positive spin on those reasons. That is fine I suppose, but I prefer to be objective where I can. Sure we can all 'focus on the positive', but then it depends on what one's objectives are. Mine are not for a 'participation trophy', others are welcome to their own.

From my perspective, ultimately we saw the creation of an R 'kit rocket'. Someone else designed and provided the motor case. Someone else designed and essentially provided the motor reload. Someone else designed the basic rocket. The 'committee' spent a great effort of sorting out detail decisions. I believe Chuck did a good job building the airframe, except that as far as I understand, the result was nearly too heavy to fly [yet a solvable problem].

A risk of building a kit rocket is that the builder may not have enough experience to know that when making changes, what things are important and what level of importance those things have. Also if they didn't design it, they don't necessarily understand it. If they have not 'worked up to it', they may lack the experience to understand the pitfalls when scaling up. Design by consensus is not a solution in itself, the flyer ultimately is the one responsible to know and understand the design. Then again, they may do fine and have a good comprehension of what matters and of what they are doing, producing a rocket that is expected to fly well and recover safely.

I would put forth that anyone who can pass an L3 cert flight should be able to fill out C3RC paperwork without difficulty. If this was some M powered >50k effort from someone who had done their L1,L2 & L3 certs all within a month and then put together an inadequate C3RC package, what would the view of that person's preparedness for extreme high power research flights be? Probably that they would benefit from some more flight experience/mentoring before taking on an extreme project.

This is not an M powered project, it is an R powered project with potential energy in the same class as tactical missiles. What level of competence and preparedness is appropriate for a project with that level of hazard? How much confidence should one have in a flyer who is learning basic stuff in the course of building a rocket powered by one of the largest motors flown?

Neither Fred nor I can point to a 100% successful R flight, but I will take credit for my motor not coming apart and for the airframe flying well at speeds over mach 3.6. It was not from my following someone else's formula or from someone else's instructions. If I had followed a formula and followed someone's already developed process, it would ultimately be just a 'kit motor', and would not prepare me for anything beyond the physical labor of casting propellant. The airframe would be a 'hope for the best' design because I would not be able to explain its design margins. I don't believe that 'hope for the best' is an appropriate design approach for projects of this size. Really big projects should be fun, they should also be taken seriously.

Folks should be proud of the effort they put into this. They should be proud of their willingness to support a grand project. I think they are poorly served by the project's abandonment for something 'more interesting'. Chuck had the opportunity to work through all of these criticisms and make the project successful. Go ahead and dismiss me as a 'hater'. I will bear no ill will, and I have plenty of stuff to be building.

br/

Tony
 
I found this project thread interesting and it was an opportunity to think about some fun problems for a while, however its ultimate failure as a project is both a disappointment because of all the effort expended by many people in good faith coming to naught, and I would claim a demonstration of what can happen when one over reaches, whether it is an L3 'kit rocket' or an R 'kit rocket'.

Fred's criticisms may be heard as aggressive, yet there are legitimate criticisms of how this project was carried out that there seems to be a knee jerk reaction against. There is a reason [probably several] why all the material products of this effort are for sale rather than getting flown. I observe that many are inclined to put a positive spin on those reasons. That is fine I suppose, but I prefer to be objective where I can. Sure we can all 'focus on the positive', but then it depends on what one's objectives are. Mine are not for a 'participation trophy', others are welcome to their own.

From my perspective, ultimately we saw the creation of an R 'kit rocket'. Someone else designed and provided the motor case. Someone else designed and essentially provided the motor reload. Someone else designed the basic rocket. The 'committee' spent a great effort of sorting out detail decisions. I believe Chuck did a good job building the airframe, except that as far as I understand, the result was nearly too heavy to fly [yet a solvable problem].

A risk of building a kit rocket is that the builder may not have enough experience to know that when making changes, what things are important and what level of importance those things have. Also if they didn't design it, they don't necessarily understand it. If they have not 'worked up to it', they may lack the experience to understand the pitfalls when scaling up. Design by consensus is not a solution in itself, the flyer ultimately is the one responsible to know and understand the design. Then again, they may do fine and have a good comprehension of what matters and of what they are doing, producing a rocket that is expected to fly well and recover safely.

I would put forth that anyone who can pass an L3 cert flight should be able to fill out C3RC paperwork without difficulty. If this was some M powered >50k effort from someone who had done their L1,L2 & L3 certs all within a month and then put together an inadequate C3RC package, what would the view of that person's preparedness for extreme high power research flights be? Probably that they would benefit from some more flight experience/mentoring before taking on an extreme project.

This is not an M powered project, it is an R powered project with potential energy in the same class as tactical missiles. What level of competence and preparedness is appropriate for a project with that level of hazard? How much confidence should one have in a flyer who is learning basic stuff in the course of building a rocket powered by one of the largest motors flown?

Neither Fred nor I can point to a 100% successful R flight, but I will take credit for my motor not coming apart and for the airframe flying well at speeds over mach 3.6. It was not from my following someone else's formula or from someone else's instructions. If I had followed a formula and followed someone's already developed process, it would ultimately be just a 'kit motor', and would not prepare me for anything beyond the physical labor of casting propellant. The airframe would be a 'hope for the best' design because I would not be able to explain its design margins. I don't believe that 'hope for the best' is an appropriate design approach for projects of this size. Really big projects should be fun, they should also be taken seriously.

Folks should be proud of the effort they put into this. They should be proud of their willingness to support a grand project. I think they are poorly served by the project's abandonment for something 'more interesting'. Chuck had the opportunity to work through all of these criticisms and make the project successful. Go ahead and dismiss me as a 'hater'. I will bear no ill will, and I have plenty of stuff to be building.

br/

Tony
I won’t just dismiss you as a hater but bring attention to it. In the end this is and was chucks project. He is putting it aside for now so his finances can be focused somewhere else. He is attempting fiscal responsible. Unless you’re financing the project your opinion doesn’t matter. There is no need to be so butt hurt
 
Tony I will simply say I disagree with your post.

It was a comfortable time-line and I had the help where needed.

It’s easy to throw rocks at the guys in the arena building a project for all to see and critique.

This is not a kit rocket. Of course I had help with the motor casing and propellant. Almost too heavy to fly? A thrust-to-weight of 6 to 1, Mach 2 and 38,000 ft doesn’t imply a rocket that is too heavy.

I’ve got a Q motor in the barn that with help I essentially poured myself.

I won’t address the rest. This was a fun project. It may still fly. But I need $200,000 right now. I can only work my rear off flying jets and sell assets to reach that goal.

I made a decision which project to pursue. Put away the rocks.

Chuck C.
 
What really put the brakes on this rocket flying in the near-term was my mentor Pat Gorzelik having a heart attack. This was a huge wake up call. We were fully ready to test the Q motor and then build 2 R motors. Pat was crucial to this project.

I didn’t have anyone else with his experience and availability. It became a show-stopper for me.

In parallel to building this project I was actively prospecting in Nevada. Almost monthly for almost a week at a time. Nevada has been worked for over 5 years now.

We finally hit the real gold. And I’m sitting here no different than the old prospectors of the 1800’s trying to get the equipment needed to get this gold. It’s $1500 an oz for a reason trust me lol.

If I let people down that wasn’t my intent. For the first time a big project was done online for all to see. I’m very proud of all of you.

Thanks for understanding. It’s not a decision taken lightly.

Chuck C.
 
If I let people down that wasn’t my intent. For the first time a big project was done online for all to see. I’m very proud of all of you.

Thanks for understanding. It’s not a decision taken lightly.

Chuck C.

Chuck,

Speaking for myself, you did not let me down, in any way.

Yes, the project not coming to completion was a "let down", for me, personally.

"Go Fever" was so thick in the air, it was palpable . . . I could almost smell the exhaust !

For me, it was an adventure and a challenge that allowed me to use skills that I have not used in a long time and face difficult challenges.

Whenever we hit a "roadblock", we "went back to the drawing board", in some cases, but we faced it, head-on.

We "adapted and overcame" as a Team, of which I was proud and honored to be a member of !

However, Chuck, I do not assign guilt or blame to you, in any way, sir !

I was deeply honored to be allowed to serve in the capacity I did and would, without hesitation, be ready to join forces with you, again, in the future !

Gene Kranz famously said, "Failure is not an option" and he was right. This project was not / is not a "failure", although "Life got in the way" and did not
allow it to reach completion . . . I look forward to your return to Rocketry, Chuck !

God Speed, my friend !

Dave F.

STEELY-EYED MISSILE MEN - AVATAR.jpg
 
Last edited:
You did a really good job Dave.

There was a lot of information flowing on this thread in no small part because of your efforts.

It really won’t be that hard to figure out a motor down the road. I’ve got the casings up for sale but won’t be disappointed if they remain in the rocket barn.

Again nicely done. It was a fun year.

Chuck C.
 
You did a really good job Dave.

There was a lot of information flowing on this thread in no small part because of your efforts.

It really won’t be that hard to figure out a motor down the road. I’ve got the casings up for sale but won’t be disappointed if they remain in the rocket barn.

Again nicely done. It was a fun year.

Chuck C.

Chuck,

Stay safe, out there in the desert. Gold mining can be hazardous, especially if the "two-legged rattlesnakes" come calling . . . Watch your six !

Thank you, my friend !

Dave F.


STEELY-EYED MISSILE MEN - AVATAR.jpg
 
Wow!!! Seeing this I just have to ask....
WHY ARE SO MANY OF YOU BADGERING HIM ABOUT CHASING THE GOLD?????
I don't get it....
When I saw this "R Powered" post, I was amazed!
I thought, that is something I would NEVER be able to afford....but it's AWESOME!!!!
I mean, I'm still trying to figure out how to afford to drive almost 150 miles to get to my first TRA event without spending $500.00 on the trip alone just to launch my first rocket..
Still trying to figure out how I'm gonna pay for the $200.00 +/- for the load/casing/etc for the launch to attempt my L1...
So, to the two "R" power flyers/complainers, one succeeded, one failed...

Rocketry is EXPENSIVE!!!!

So, after your first "R" flight, did y'all get offers for a multi-million dollar contract from TRA? NAR? NBA? NFL? NHRA?..
WHAT? NO???? WOW!!!
Your rockets...MY rockets fly faster than the cars in the NHRA!!!
So no contract?????
Of course not!!!!
You will NEVER make money FLYING rockets!!!
You may make money manufacturing rockets (but the pickings will be slim-too much competition)...

There are other areas that are possible to scratch some cash in the field of rocketry...but again, pickings are slim....

Gold mining...

Gold mining is EXPENSIVE!!!!

But, it has a return!!!! ...potentially...
And that's a lot better than NO RETURN!!!!

Simple math....
Rockets: NO RETURN
Gold: YOU COULD BE RICH
Life: YOU GOTTA DO WHAT YA GOTTA DO
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I would ABSOLUTLY rather be chasing gold than chasing rockets...

So, In my humble opinion......
GET OFF HIS BACK!!!!!

S.S.
 
I see rivalry between downhill skiers and snowboarders. The fact is that whatever method you CHOOSE to get down the hill doesn't matter IMHO. As long as you are paying the money, having fun and behaving within the rules then go for it.

Same situation here.

I was a little shocked to hear you had shelved this Chuck, but you have to live your life with your priorities. Good luck with your search for Aurum :).
 
Personally, I'm just glad this is over. No matter the reason.
 
Probably a good time to close this thread. the project is over and what was a contentious relationship between those who supported it and those who did not; those who agreed with the build strategy and those who did not, those who felt obligated to see test data and those who did not.

With the project being over it is only going to get worse, and for no real reason.

This is over, let it rest in peace
 
I mean, I'm still trying to figure out how to afford to drive almost 150 miles to get to my first TRA event without spending $500.00 on the trip alone just to launch my first rocket..Still trying to figure out how I'm gonna pay for the $200.00 +/- for the load/casing/etc for the launch to attempt my L1...

S.S.

S.S.

Welcome to high-power rocketry ! ( we're about the same age, I'm 58 )

Where are you located ?

I'm going to address your L1 issues, one by one.


(1) Travel - 150 miles is a "day trip", provided that you are "mission-oriented" . . . Cheap gas, fast food, no hotel ( drive back home the same day ).

(2) Load / Casing expenses - You will have to buy a reload . . . However, in most cases, someone at the launch will let you borrow a case, especially for Certification. ( Contact them, in advance ).

Assuming your car gets 25 mpg, you are looking at 12 gallons +/- of fuel and what ever your local price is. At $2.50/ga;. . . . $30.00

(3) Food - Three "gourmet meals" at McDonald's . . . $20.00 +/-

(4) Reload - If you fly an Aerotech motor, an "H" reload runs about $30.00 - $50.00, depending on who you get it from and whether it's a 29mm or 38mm reload.
An "I" motor will raise the cost to about $40.00 - $65.00, depending on Total Impulse. Cesaroni reloads should be close to the same cost.

(5) Launch Fee - Your "flying fee" at the flying field is about $10.00.

So, a "minimalist" approach would cost you $90.00 - $125.00, given the above parameters.

Dave F.

STEELY-EYED MISSILE MEN - AVATAR.jpg
 
Personally, I'm just glad this is over. No matter the reason.

Probably a good time to close this thread. the project is over and what was a contentious relationship between those who supported it and those who did not; those who agreed with the build strategy and those who did not, those who felt obligated to see test data and those who did not.

With the project being over it is only going to get worse, and for no real reason.

This is over, let it rest in peace

Gentlemen,

Nothing is "over", until Chuck says so, officially.

At this point, the project is in "mothballs", according to what Chuck has said.

This is Chuck's thread, so let him decide if, and when, to close it, please !

Dave F.

STEELY-EYED MISSILE MEN - AVATAR.jpg
 
S.S.

Welcome to high-power rocketry ! ( we're about the same age, I'm 58 )

Where are you located ?

I'm going to address your L1 issues, one by one.


(1) Travel - 150 miles is a "day trip", provided that you are "mission-oriented" . . . Cheap gas, fast food, no hotel ( drive back home the same day ).

(2) Load / Casing expenses - You will have to buy a reload . . . However, in most cases, someone at the launch will let you borrow a case, especially for Certification. ( Contact them, in advance ).

Assuming your car gets 25 mpg, you are looking at 12 gallons +/- of fuel and what ever your local price is. At $2.50/ga;. . . . $30.00

(3) Food - Three "gourmet meals" at McDonald's . . . $20.00 +/-

(4) Reload - If you fly an Aerotech motor, an "H" reload runs about $30.00 - $50.00, depending on who you get it from and whether it's a 29mm or 38mm reload.
An "I" motor will raise the cost to about $40.00 - $65.00, depending on Total Impulse. Cesaroni reloads should be close to the same cost.

(5) Launch Fee - Your "flying fee" at the flying field is about $10.00.

So, a "minimalist" approach would cost you $90.00 - $125.00, given the above parameters.

Dave F.

View attachment 396591

As for number 2, the motor, look at DMS Aerotech motors. The price is a little higher than a reload but you don’t need a case. Adjust the delay after taking it out of the package and you are ready to go.
 
And, looks like Dave's gonna have alotta spare time on his hands;) Aarrgh!!
 
im sorry to say it guys, but it is over.

Chuck is selling everything needed to support this flight to include the recovery system, launch rig, and even stated in post 2439 that he is entertaining the idea of selling the rocket itself.

I get that this is hard to take for some, kinda like that first high school break up. you don't want to admit that its over, but the sooner you do, the better it is for everyone.

there will be other projects, some big, and some REALLY BIG, and no doubt some on TRF will voluntarily throw themselves at those too

lets all take a breath and move on
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top