I'm working on my next LPR project. It'll probably have a BT-20 or BT-50 body diameter, or maybe a combination of both with a BT-20 to BT-50 transition. I also want to avoid using disposable wadding. I dislike the idea of potential "litter" when I can't recover all the pieces used during a launch and I dislike even more the fact that I have to spend money on disposable wadding.
So it looks like I have two alternatives: resusable wadding (like Dinochutes 3x3 chute protector) or an ejection charge baffle. And now I have a few questions about these. Please note these questions are asked within the LPR context and with the use of a plastic or nylon parachute (12" or so) recovery system.
1. If using reusable wadding, instead of threading the shock cord through a slit in the corner of the wadding, could I use a snap swivel or small metal keyring loop to attach the protector to the shock cord, but still allow it to slide up and down the shock cord? I figure this would make it much easier to remove the reusable wadding for cleaning and transfer to another LPR rocket.
2. Will a 3x3 Dinochutes reusable chute protector work in a BT-20 model rocket? I wonder if it'll be too bulky and my only option is the an ejection charge baffle.
3. Does anyone believe the baffle or reusable wadding has an inherent advantage over the other when installed in a BT-50 or BT-20 main body tube? If so, why?
I've done some research on both, and it seems like no system is perfect in terms of fully protecting the parachute and payload (like an altimeter). I'm trying to decide which is better for me and if using both is also a viable option (yes, I know there'll be a weight penalty, but performance is a tertiary consideration in this rocket's design).
Thanks ahead for all your advice.