Originally posted by DynaSoar
Some people insist it's specifically against rules, and sometimes quote one rule set or another, but upon checking no such rule exists. Confronted with this, they then insist that although it may not be against the rules, nobody should do it because it could be used in a weapon, and if we started doing this then The Government Will Come Down On Us Harder Than They Already Have. There's clearly a problem with logic and rationality when it comes to the subject, and it has little to do with the safety factor of an actively guided rocket. (Which is itself a non-issue if the rocket fails safe, that is it acts like it had no guidance if the guidance fails and flies like a normal rocket).
I don't think this fail-safe (though perhaps the best that could be done under those circumstances) would be enough to ensure that an actively guided rocket would always be at least as safe as an unguided one. The guidance system might not "know" it had failed, for one thing. Also, if a failure has caused a dangerous trajectory, flipping the trim tabs to neutral and continuing on course could be a bad thing. If I were doing this, I'd have a passive/active system, where the effect of the fins was mostly a passive one, with active trimming for finer control.
Originally posted by DynaSoar
Would you get more altitude if you worked against weathercocking, or would you take a power hit fighting the wind and actually lose altitude? Weathercocking can ge a good thing; you want apogee upwind if you're going to drift downwind. Just working out a guided acsent and normal unguided descent to a spot landing would make for an entire contest category worth of flying.
I was thinking more in terms of sudden but short gusts, rather than a steady wind from one direction. With a steady wind, you want it to fly upwind and fload back downwind. With a sudden short gust, the rocket can tip, fly way over yonder, and land vertically into the woods or back yards or highway that it ended up above at the end of boost.
On the altitude question, I'd surmise that it depends on the degree of weathercocking. If it tips just a bit, then it'll fly higher if left more streamlined. If it tips way over, it's no longer climbing much unless it's tipped back toward vertical.
I thought of the new event possibilities too. Either ascent or descent or both could be guided, with separate categories for each, like they have for boost gliders vs. rocket gliders.
Originally posted by DynaSoar
Many rocket drag races/simultaneous launches make very visible just how erratic our ascent paths are. Now image several identical birds with similar control systems, programmed to fly straight up during boost, but arc over away from each other during coast/smoke. Rocketry aerobatics. Watch any video of the Thunderbirds, Blue Angels, Snow Birds (eh?) or Red Arrows (blimey!) for more ideas.
At my last launch, a friend took some digital video of a three-way drag race (the first and only drag race I ever did so far). His scratch-built wiggled all the way up but took off like a scalded cat. My Big Bertha went up "like a train pulling out of the station" (in his words), straight up and very stable. My Micro-Maxx plastic brick went up, tipped, flew "over there" somewhere, and we didn't find it. I figured out that day that with multiple launches you want a set of dedicated eyes on each bird.
My 150th post. Woo Hoo!
