Any interesting CATO stories?

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

CTRockets

Active Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
I think many people her would have a CATO story or two. One where you think everything will go off without a hitch only to ddiscover that 5 feet off the launch pad things go horribly wrong.

My first and only CATO was when I was 11 years old, and I take complete and utter responsibility for what happened. I had built a Big Bertha rocket (the first of many Big Bertha Rockets I have flown) and set it up for launch in a football field behind a local high school. I pressed the launch button and it went about 4 feet and The engine lodged in the middle of the rcket and blew out the side of the rocket which was on fire for a few seconds. I found that I had not glued the motor mount in the Bertha proprly causing it to dislodge and get caught in the middle of the rocket. Needless to say I have learned from that mistake.

Anyone want to share their stories?

Mike
 

shreadvector

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
9,067
Reaction score
246
:rolleyes: Here we go again....

Cato is not an acronym. It is simply a slang shorthand abbreviation for catastrophic failure. Discussed endlessly in other threads on the previous TRF and recently on YORF where numerous rolcketry old timers supported this fact and others refused to accept the truth.

https://forums.rocketshoppe.com/showthread.php?t=4411

I would suggest fixing this thread and taking any and all discussion of the beleif in the false acronym over to that thread on YORF. [comment removed w/ consent] :D;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

jadebox

Roger Smith
TRF Sponsor
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
5,759
Reaction score
273
[comment removed w/ consent]

-- Roger
 
Last edited by a moderator:

shreadvector

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
9,067
Reaction score
246
Not only that, but he doesn't even describe a Cato. His engine/motor didn't fail, his motor mount failed!
Well, motors can cato and entire rocket systems can also cato since it is a catastrophic failure. Of course, we are usually using the slang term to identify a failure that has the motor as the root cause.

I'm enjoying a 44 ounce cup of BRAWNDO right now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy
 

CTRockets

Active Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Sorry, Im new here. Didnt mean to cause any controversy. I should have looked in other forums before posting.
 

jadebox

Roger Smith
TRF Sponsor
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
5,759
Reaction score
273
Anyone want to share their stories?
I've had a few memorable CATOs that I'd like to forget. :)

Once, I had a run of bad luck. First, my Shadow clone was incinerated on the pad. The motor failed, burning from the top. Not too long after that, another motor failed blowing the head off my Akavish.



The UFO you see flying away is a 1/4" plywood bulkhead that was blown out of the top of the rocket.

Later, our larger "Akavish" also suffered a problem with a motor. In this case, the J motor over-pressurized at ignition shooting off the rear enclosure and firing the motor up through two 1/4" centering rings and the top of the rocket.



A short video of the event is at:

https://www.payloadbay.com/video-7934.html

-- Roger
 

Der Red Max

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
239
Reaction score
2
Sorry, Im new here. Didnt mean to cause any controversy. I should have looked in other forums before posting.
No need to apologize, that's what forums are for - to learn from others. Some use it to inform, others to disseminate ignorance. You sound as if you're part of those wanting to know what's correct. We need more like you, welcome aboard!
 

CTRockets

Active Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Thanks. I see things as learning experiences. Im glad I found this board. Seems like a great place to learn from others.:)
 

shreadvector

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
9,067
Reaction score
246

MysticalRockets

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
604
Reaction score
1
Don't have any photos, unfortunately.

My first reload. A 29mm F40. I put the delay in wrong. I put the spacer end pointing out instead of in.

Yeah, forward closure failure. Went up about 100 feet and turned into a flaming ruin. Did get the nosecone and one fin back. Got most of the case back too. Just needed another forward closure.

But it looked great. Flaming death. Loved it.
 

Johnly

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
886
Reaction score
256
I remember a Delta Clipper flight where the D12-0 booster CATOed on the pad, but the upper stage motor lit and the upper half had a nominal flight.

John
 

REAPER

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
129
Reaction score
0
:rolleyes: Here we go again....

Cato is not an acronym. It is simply a slang shorthand abbreviation for catastrophic failure. Discussed endlessly in other threads on the previous TRF and recently on YORF where numerous rolcketry old timers supported this fact and others refused to accept the truth.

https://forums.rocketshoppe.com/showthread.php?t=4411

I would suggest fixing this thread and taking any and all discussion of the beleif in the false acronym over to that thread on YORF. no point in 'stinking up this place'. :D;)
I always thought CATO was an acronym for Catastrophy-At-Take-Off.
 

jadebox

Roger Smith
TRF Sponsor
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
5,759
Reaction score
273
Thanks. I see things as learning experiences. Im glad I found this board. Seems like a great place to learn from others.:)
There are a few [comment removed w/ consent] who will insist otherwise, but you were not wrong to use "CATO" as an acronym. Lots of people use it that way and it's no more or less correct that using "cato." Undoubtably, the use of "cato" pre-dates "CATO," but that doesn't make it more correct.

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=CATO+catastrophe+at+take+off

-- Roger
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BsSmith

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
807
Reaction score
0
Back when I was about 9, I was still a little scared of rockets still. My dad had old estes kits, a Seastike D, and an Omega. It was before we knew how to tape the motors together, so the rockets would go up on the first stage and the second stages would never light. We spent tons of time replacing the body tubes after every lawn dart.

About a year later, we had just gotten an estes orange plastic rocket, I forgot the name. It launched on the little 1/4 A's. So we had it on the pad, and it exploded when we tried to launch it. It split in half and a 6" wide fireball flew out of it, went up about 10' and snuffed out in the grass. It must have been the delay charge.
 

Rich Pitzeruse

In rocketry hybernation
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
286
Reaction score
0
I'm not sure what was learned here. But here's my CATO story.

Many moons ago, probably 20 years or so, I flew an Estes V2 on a D12-3. The rocket got about 15' in the air and the motor turned itself into a ball of fire about the size of a basketball. It completely shattered the tailcone and fins. The engine, err, I mean motor (don't want the motor/engine police after me!) had split straight up the side.

I rebuilt it, pieced the tailcone back together and cut new fins for those that were too destroyed, and still have the rocket.
 

shreadvector

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
9,067
Reaction score
246
There are a few [comment removed w/ consent] who will insist otherwise, but you were not wrong to use "CATO" as an acronym. Lots of people use it that way and it's no more or less correct that using "cato." Undoubtably, the use of "cato" pre-dates "CATO," but that doesn't make it more correct.

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=CATO+catastrophe+at+take+off

-- Roger
i requested that people take the discussion about the incorrect acronym vs. the correct abbreviation/slang term take it to the original thread on YORF.

Anyone who reads it completely will understand what is correct and what is a set of words made-up to fit a mistaken assumption that a term heard verbally was an acronym.

Rockets do not "take-off". See the YORF thread.

The multiple threads here on TRF are in the old database and not available.

[comment removed w/ consent]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

SwingWing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
1,884
Reaction score
204
Why would a cato be limited to "take-off"? Can't catastrophy happen anytime?
 

troj

Wielder Of the Skillet Of Harsh Discipline, Potent
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
14,501
Reaction score
426
There are a few [deleted] who will insist otherwise, but you were not wrong to use "CATO" as an acronym. Lots of people use it that way and it's no more or less correct that using "cato." Undoubtably, the use of "cato" pre-dates "CATO," but that doesn't make it more correct.
Because it's common practice doesn't make it "right".

It's no different than writing, "The horse's are pretty". Misuse of the apostrophe when making something plural has become very common, and even mainstream media does it far too often.

That, however, doesn't make it correct.

It's no different than your argument.

-Kevin
 
Last edited by a moderator:

jadebox

Roger Smith
TRF Sponsor
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
5,759
Reaction score
273
Because it's common practice doesn't make it "right".

It's no different than writing, "The horse's are pretty". Misuse of the apostrophe when making something plural has become very common, and even mainstream media does it far too often.

That, however, doesn't make it correct.

It's no different than your argument.

-Kevin
There's a large difference between formal writing and information language. Someone made up "cato" recently and someone else made up "CATO." There's nothing that makes one correct and the other incorrect.

-- Roger
 

shreadvector

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
9,067
Reaction score
246
I was not and am not "looking for a chance to jump on someone for a perceived wrong".

I am now under the impression that you are intentionally argueing with me because you have some kind of personal problem with me and this impression is based upon the post I am currently responding to as well as the one above where you actually resortet to name-calling (mild, but still insulting).

If I provide information and it happens to be a correction, I provide a full explanation and I do not do so for any reason other than to help people learn the correct information. I definitely do not like the propagation of false information, especially when it is being done intentionally or in spite.

Others seem to have a similar opinion:

https://forums.rocketshoppe.com/showpost.php?p=59692&postcount=40

https://forums.rocketshoppe.com/showpost.php?p=59800&postcount=46

https://forums.rocketshoppe.com/showpost.php?p=59806&postcount=47

https://forums.rocketshoppe.com/showpost.php?p=59854&postcount=49

Even if you have a problem with me personally posting information, what about all the others who posted the above identical information. Some were not as polite as I tried to be.

Maybe they will chime in here as well? Or maybe they respected the request to keep the discussion over on the original thread on YORF?



You started the discussion here. Instead of always looking for a chance to jump on someone for a perceived wrong, please just let it go in the future.

"CATO" is an acronym because people use it as an acronym. Someone coined it and it caught on. Certainly it is a contrived acronym based on "cato." But, acronyms are coined every day and there is no "official clearing house" for them. If you don't choose to use the acronym, that's fine. But, don't criticize others for using it.

The "Take Off" part is, as I explained, irrelevant. The acronym was apparently contrived to fit the letters "CATO" and the definition as "Catastrophe At Take Off" was most likely based on "JATO." Other people have contrived different definitions for CATO including the self-referential one "CATO At Take Off."

Yes, the explicit definitions of the acronym doen't make sense. They don't have to. It's just the result of someone playing with the acronym - something done for fun. Like building rockets.

Now, please drop it and let the discussion return to actual "CATO" or "cato" stories.

-- Roger
 

RangerStl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
1,086
Reaction score
1
jadebox and shredvector and Der_Red_Max:

Please take this disagreement offline. We're getting distracted from the original purpose of the thread which is talking about your engines failing at launch.

Please don't take this argument any farther in public.

Respectfully

RangerStl
 

MarkII

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
8,250
Reaction score
22
Sorry, Im new here. Didnt mean to cause any controversy. I should have looked in other forums before posting.
I think that Fred overreacted to your post, reading things into it that you never said. Fred's a good guy, and he makes great contributions to forum discussions, but he's a little touchy about some things. This is obviously one of those sore subjects for him, but that's his problem, not yours. You did absolutely nothing wrong.

OK, let's get back on topic here. I'm interested in the topic of this thread, too, and I'd like to see some more <propulsion device failure> stories. ;)

Mark \\.
 

MarkM

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
2,215
Reaction score
1
It's more like 10' off the pad, but here's my entry
Ouch!

How about a Roman Candle? Roger...you probably remember this one at NEFAR in August. Check out the video HERE
Forward snap ring let go on a EX motor once motor fully pressurized, then propellant proceded to burn. Fortunately the ebay (with electronics) was perfectly fine. The chute was not salvageable and fin can...well, the video explains it's condition.

PS: Based on the experiences, seems like this is more a HPR thread than LPR,
 
Last edited:

H_Rocket

Death by Powerpoint
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
4,079
Reaction score
492
Location
North Central Texas
Loki I405 in my Sudden Rush - Forgot the forward closure O-ring

This is the flight that spawned the saying

"If this kind of thing bothers you, get a train set"
 

jflis

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
15,432
Reaction score
62
My most interesting STORY involved a scratch built cluster that was launched at a CMASS launch. It was a 3 or 4 motor cluster and upon ignition 1-2 of the motors cato'ed. This released one of the motors from the model and off it went...

...Now, I'm off to the side talking to someone (standing right next to Bill Ralston's table - Bill was the LCO at the time of the launch) keeping my eye on things while chatting about something when I heard the BANG!

I started to turn towards the launch pad when I saw the loose motor, totally stable, and coming right at me...

I instinctively started to turn away from the oncoming motor and tried to drop to the ground when the thing hit me in the temple. Well, the reaction to that was to spin and drop faster and I found myself laying across all of Bill's rockets... ...SMOOSH!

Didn't really hurt, but startled the heck out of me! Needless to say, the owner of the model was very concerned :) And Bill was none too happy... Actually, only a few models got damages and most of that was broken fins.

It was an experience though...

Some cool pictures I've gotten over the years are of this Maxi-Brute Honest John and this Foam Cup Rocket

If you think cato's do a lot of damage to *conventional* rockets, try one in a FOAM rocket... Not pretty... LOL

jim
 
Top