Additive Aerospace RunCam mount

Sandy H.

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
1,935
Reaction score
1,340
Got my 4" Runcam 2 mount from Additive Aerospace a few days ago, around a week after ordering, I think. I took it out to see how the Runcam fit once i got it and was very impressed with the fitment of everything. I assumed I'd have to shim the camera with electrical tape or something to get it to not move around, but both the design and manufacturing quality made that a non-issue.

I was impressed with the layer resolution (not sure if that's the right term) that people are getting now-a-days - this is one of the best filament prints I've seen with my own eyes, even though maybe its common now. Sure, its rougher than an SLA print or other manufacturing method, but I think it will be very easy to make it smooth and if I want a glossy paint finish, I bet it will work great.

The only thing I would add to my 'wish-list' would be to make the design a little more aerodynamic. I *think* extending it a bit so it looked more tear-drop than rounded edge might give better performance, but at the same time, if you're flying a Runcam, the rocket is probably big and a little inefficiency of the transition probably doesn't matter. Given my knowledge of aerodynamics, maybe this is the most efficient shape for rockets that fly in this velocity range anyway. . . what do I know!

Anyway, assuming the Runcam performs well, I see myself buying a few more of these for big rockets. I'd still love to have a nice small camera form factor (808-ish), but I think the combo of the Additive Aerospace mount and Runcam seems like a valid platform for larger rockets.

Sandy.
 

Attachments

  • runcam_01.jpg
    runcam_01.jpg
    1.6 MB · Views: 1
  • runcam_02.jpg
    runcam_02.jpg
    1.5 MB · Views: 0

rjenkins133

Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2022
Messages
18
Reaction score
5
Location
Orrville, Ohio
I designed and printed my own Runcam mounts and they are much less aerodynamic than that, but the rocket is a 4" rocket with four fairly large fins (it's actually an old Rocket R&D Brutus that I built 20 years ago).

The less than aerodynamic design doesn't seem to affect the rocket flight in any noticeable way.

Also I initially had problems with the Runcam just stopping after a few seconds while recording. Their customer service told me to use a specific Samsung SD card (Samsung EVO Select U3) - which I bought and have used ever since without any issues.

Randy
 
Last edited:

teepot

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Dec 7, 2019
Messages
3,114
Reaction score
3,133
Location
Pahrump, Nevada
Got my 4" Runcam 2 mount from Additive Aerospace a few days ago, around a week after ordering, I think. I took it out to see how the Runcam fit once i got it and was very impressed with the fitment of everything. I assumed I'd have to shim the camera with electrical tape or something to get it to not move around, but both the design and manufacturing quality made that a non-issue.

I was impressed with the layer resolution (not sure if that's the right term) that people are getting now-a-days - this is one of the best filament prints I've seen with my own eyes, even though maybe its common now. Sure, its rougher than an SLA print or other manufacturing method, but I think it will be very easy to make it smooth and if I want a glossy paint finish, I bet it will work great.

The only thing I would add to my 'wish-list' would be to make the design a little more aerodynamic. I *think* extending it a bit so it looked more tear-drop than rounded edge might give better performance, but at the same time, if you're flying a Runcam, the rocket is probably big and a little inefficiency of the transition probably doesn't matter. Given my knowledge of aerodynamics, maybe this is the most efficient shape for rockets that fly in this velocity range anyway. . . what do I know!

Anyway, assuming the Runcam performs well, I see myself buying a few more of these for big rockets. I'd still love to have a nice small camera form factor (808-ish), but I think the combo of the Additive Aerospace mount and Runcam seems like a valid platform for larger rockets.

Sandy.
Is the mount permanent or can it be moved from one rocket to another?
 

jkovac

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2015
Messages
142
Reaction score
43
I agree with you, the Additive Aerospace shrouds are great.

If you haven’t done so already, make sure you test the heck out of your RunCam II before you fly it. I bought two in a row that would start recording but shut off for no reason after 20 seconds. I was baffled until I read about others having the same issue, and they figured out you have to start recording, immediately stop, and then immediately start again, and then it would keep running. Hopefully they’ve worked the bugs out by now, but just make sure it keeps recording and saves the recording so you don’t miss getting videos of multiple flights like I did.
 

Sandy H.

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
1,935
Reaction score
1,340
It attaches with screws, so in theory it could go rocket to rocket. The supplies screws look self-threading and if I were going to move from one to another, I would likely put some form of insert or back-up nut. Still deciding on exactly what to do on this build, as I haven't done much with filament wound fiberglass.

Sandy.
 

waltr

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2021
Messages
955
Reaction score
569
Location
SE Pennsylvania
I bought one of these mounts for the Mobius camera to put on a LOC 4" Goblin. Did first two flights with camera facing down and third with camera facing up (I wanted to see the chute deploy). All flew fine but probably lost a little altitude with forward facing camera due to increased drag.
4 screws hold it onto the BT and easy to remove or swap.
The Mobius mount has the camera parallel to the BT so half the view was BT and fins. I then shimmed the lens end and filled the space with epoxy/micro-ballons. Now the BT & fins only take 1/4 the view.

These are great mounts and would buy again.
 

Sailfish1957

Active Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Aug 29, 2022
Messages
35
Reaction score
2
Location
Southeast Florida USA
Got my 4" Runcam 2 mount from Additive Aerospace a few days ago, around a week after ordering, I think. I took it out to see how the Runcam fit once i got it and was very impressed with the fitment of everything. I assumed I'd have to shim the camera with electrical tape or something to get it to not move around, but both the design and manufacturing quality made that a non-issue.

I was impressed with the layer resolution (not sure if that's the right term) that people are getting now-a-days - this is one of the best filament prints I've seen with my own eyes, even though maybe its common now. Sure, its rougher than an SLA print or other manufacturing method, but I think it will be very easy to make it smooth and if I want a glossy paint finish, I bet it will work great.

The only thing I would add to my 'wish-list' would be to make the design a little more aerodynamic. I *think* extending it a bit so it looked more tear-drop than rounded edge might give better performance, but at the same time, if you're flying a Runcam, the rocket is probably big and a little inefficiency of the transition probably doesn't matter. Given my knowledge of aerodynamics, maybe this is the most efficient shape for rockets that fly in this velocity range anyway. . . what do I know!

Anyway, assuming the Runcam performs well, I see myself buying a few more of these for big rockets. I'd still love to have a nice small camera form factor (808-ish), but I think the combo of the Additive Aerospace mount and Runcam seems like a valid platform for larger rockets.

Sandy.
How might this shroud work on a 3" tube (I have a LOC IRIS 3 that is almost 5 feet in length)
 
Top