You lost me there. I am seeing a velocity of just over zero at drogue deployment.Your rocket had considerable speed at apogee. The simulation had zero speed there - indicating a vertical simulation. The rocket turned more than the simulation predicted (vertical simulations don't gravity-turn at all, actually) indicating any combination of the following:
1) Launcher whip
3) A launch angle not perfectly vertical
4) Something else like that there
Actual ascents are rarely near-perfectly vertical. That said, the correspondence isn't bad.
Think of it this way, if you launch it again, you'll get different numbers. A simulation cannot be more predictive than real-world variability.
No. The sim is in FPS; the flight data is in MPH. Peak velocity of about 175 fps in the sim would equal 263 mph. RRC3 showed 242, so not so far off.Your apogee numbers are pretty close. The velocities don't match up well; are the units the same?
Looked at it a little more. Did you have an early deployment? Looks like you might have still been going up when it deployed. That may account for the lower altitude than the sim; although you are only off by about 50 feet or so. Hard to read the simulation graph.
I see it too. But the velocity is derived from barometric data on the RRC3 so I wouldn't put too much faith in it. The pressure altitude data does show something happening at about 7 seconds which is well before apogee. Motor ejection perhaps.?? I'm seeing ~425 fps at apogee - just shy of 8 seconds ??
Sorry. Thought I was looking at mixed data. If it's baro data, it's just vertical velocity at best - and (you're right) numerical differentiation of baro data doesn't give you the best.I see it too. But the velocity is derived from barometric data on the RRC3 so I wouldn't put too much faith in it. The pressure altitude data does show something happening at about 7 seconds which is well before apogee. Motor ejection perhaps.