# Hello from Carber Energetics!

### Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

Status
Not open for further replies.

#### don carter

The igniter wires WILL exit the forward bulkhead as of now.

##### Well-Known Member
That clears up much confusion. Thank you.

As such, do you agree that the primary intended use is as an upper stage motor and not as an initial booster stage motor? I ask because if it is intended as an initial stage booster motor, I would be curious what the typical connection method to the ground based launch controller would be. Earlier someone mentioned umbilical and while that would be interesting and novel in the hobby, I'm not sure how that could be retro-fitted into existing rockets.

Last edited:

#### don carter

Heada. I didn't design the igniter. IF you'll give me some time, I'll explain the entire igniter to everyone. I can assure you and all those concerned that the igniter system WILL pass NAR inspection. IF however, they don't pass muster, there are always up-the-throat igniters. Right? Lol! We just think our igniter system to be very innovative.

Not only that Heada, but our prices are going to amaze you! I want you and others to be happy with our prices.

#### ThirstyBarbarian

##### Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
This thread is like a courtroom drama!
I can’t wait to see how it turns out!

#### cerving

##### Owner, Eggtimer Rocketry
TRF Supporter
Judge Judy would be showing no mercy about now...

#### ksaves2

I wondering what's the plan if the preinstalled igniter is a dud, or is that not common in K+ motors?
Interesting question if the preinstalled igniter is a dud. In that case, would it be removable and one could supply their own? If not removable, then what? Respectfully, one is eventually going to be a dud if enough get out into circulation. (Even if the igniter performs nominally, some grains can get a coating of oxidation on them and be hard to light if the grains are old.)

Plus lay off on the igniter thing, I'm sure they are investigating the rule issues with the authorities and will adjust their plans accordingly if there is a snag. Ematch based igniters I'd worry about static discharge and even continuity testing but a nichrome based system of suitable gauge will require substantial current to heat the pyrogen. Static shouldn't be a problem at all especially if the pyrogen takes a high heat of activation to start combustion.

The head end igniter used for multi staging is a valid analogy here and doesn't seem the rule mavens soil their shorts over it as long as a best practice is used. (Like not applying power to anything until the stack is upright on the pad.)

The fact they were in business before suggests they have the proper skill set to be doing this. I was going to go off on a tirade if the individuals were "babes in the woods" but that is not the case.
My hats off to them. Good luck.

Kurt Savegnago

Last edited:

#### ksaves2

How you get past NFPA 1127 4.13.5? Just saying, you'd need to have a change in the NFPA requirements. Good luck there!
Ahhhhh, The OP originally posted that he and his partners were in business making/selling motors previously. I would presume they are already well aware of the NFPA rules and requirements. I'm sure they will be going through the motor certification process and all that will take time. Remember, the motors need to be certified in order to be salable to general fliers. Research propellant (technically) can't be sold.

Kurt

#### ksaves2

Oooops,

I missed message #93 so the dud igniter thing is answered. ie. One can use their own. Kurt

#### Antares JS

##### Well-Known Member
I figure the worst case scenario if you want to use these HEI igniters is that you will have to walk your rocket out to the pad without the motor in it, then install the igniter in the motor and the motor in the rocket at the pad. He did say some time ago that the igniter would be installed by the user during prep.

The question that I have now is, if your ignition leads are coming out the forward end, how do you connect the leads to a conventional launch controller? Or is Heada right that these are intended to be used as upper stage motors?

#### Mike Haberer

##### Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
The head in igniter used for multi staging is a valid analogy here and doesn't seem the rule mavens soil their shorts over it as long as a best practice is used. (Like not applying power to anything until the stack is upright on the pad.)

Kurt Savegnago
They don't soil their shorts because they meet the best practice requirement by doing final prep at an away table, after they get approval of the RSO and before they go to the pad. They are the prescribed distance away from people both behind the LCO table and from the pads. It's .big boys and girls launches at big vents, not your average L1/L2 flyer.

#### hobie1dog

Did you find me?
Ahhh, that's it. Now you need to put up some pictures and expand your QRZ page a little bit. Did you go to my page and read it?

TRF Supporter
LOOK! A chicken!

#### Arpak

##### Well-Known Member
Just woke up and this thread turned into sort of a dumpster fire.

I vote either that or a chili as a company logo because it has been spicy.

#### Titan II

##### Well-Known Member
The issue is that the safety code explicitly calls for the igniter to be installed on the pad with the rocket in a vertical position.
That is not correct. It is installed at the pad or a designated area. The rocket is also to be situated to minimize risk to people. The rocket does not have to be in a vertical position.

#### cwbullet

##### Obsessed with Rocketry
Staff member
Global Mod
I am pretty excited for new options. Any chance you might make a long burn motor?

#### jderimig

NFPA has no enforcement power but insurance underwriters do. This hobby only exists at the pleasure of our insurance carriers. If the the underwriters want us to observe nfpa then we strictly follow nfpa.

#### rcktnut

##### Well-Known Member
I have a suggestion. Make both types of motors available, up the nozzle ignition and head end ignition for staging. If the motors are as good and as cheap as you say your sales will be much better if both types are available.

#### don carter

Hi Hobie. Nope. Haven't read your page on qrz just yet. Glad you found me. How long did you say you've been a ham? I've been a ham since 1983 when I got my original call sign KC4KGD. Sometimes I wish I had kept it but a call sign with an N in the beginning is a sort of a rarity anyway these days. It's pretty good for working CW. Do you work much CW? I have several keys but I usually use my straight key. I don't work fast CW must. Usually 12-15 WPM is about what I do. Even slower if I'm talking to a new ham who is just getting into CW. It's sort of a dying art but I love the nostalgia.

#### Scrapmaster87

##### Well-Known Member
Heada. I didn't design the igniter. IF you'll give me some time, I'll explain the entire igniter to everyone. I can assure you and all those concerned that the igniter system WILL pass NAR inspection. IF however, they don't pass muster, there are always up-the-throat igniters. Right? Lol! We just think our igniter system to be very innovative.

Not only that Heada, but our prices are going to amaze you! I want you and others to be happy with our prices.
Screw/snap in forward bulkhead/plug with the integral igniter? With the popularity of screw-on motor retainers these days this doesn't sound too bad for L2 motors. Routing the wires out of the booster to hook up with the pad leads will be an interesting build challenge, that and not taking the pad leads along for a ride.

I see a non-igniter forward plug being a popular option. Still a neat concept still if only an e-match is required like CTI motors.

#### Thundercloud

##### Well-Known Member
I actually certified on a Reaction Labs motor!

#### don carter

rcktnut. Sheesh! Can you use another term besides "cheap?" lol! How about inexpensive? I like that term much better! The motors will be designed as such that you could used an up the throat igniter if you so desired.

As for you cwbullet, yes, there is a chance for a long burn motor, but that term is relative. Tell me what you mean by "long burn." For instance, the last motor we made was an "O" class motor and it's burn time was 8.8 seconds. That's reasonably long. Its web was thick and it was a huge motor. Oh and by the way, it had a built in, integral, whatever you want to call it, igniter. It was flown at Smoke Creek. We built 4 of those motors. We sold 2 to a chap in Utah who we know flew one, we static fired two, and we don't know what he did with his other motor.

We built the motors used in the movie "MOSQUITO COAST." If you watch, you'll see drums flying up in the air. Those drums flying up in the air were powered by 3 each of our motors. they would be considered "N" class motors. We built 9 for the movie.

We built 100 "L" size motors for an aerospace company in Texas back in the 80s who needed "smoky" motors because they were working on the "STAR WARS" initiative during the Reagan years. They ALL had integral igniters and they all worked. 100%. We had to add a chemical that produced lots of smoke and at the time, we had another consultant we had hired from Aerojet. He was retired. He's now deceased but he was a Ph.D. chemist and I have his old lab notebook his wife gave me after his death. He developed the propellant for the 2nd stage of the Minuteman I. Quite a guy. Anyway, when we told him we needed lots of smoke, he gave us the name of a chemical that would do that. And boy did it ever!! The company needed tracking smoke and they were happy.

I tell you these things to let you know how far I go back insofar as making solid propellant motors. We've made motors with Pban, HTPB, CTPB, and Plastisol.

#### rcktnut

##### Well-Known Member
rcktnut. Sheesh! Can you use another term besides "cheap?" lol! How about inexpensive? I like that term much better! The motors will be designed as such that you could used an up the throat igniter if you so desired.
OK inexpensive!!! Nothing really "cheap" in this hobby!! As far as motors go nothing inexpensive neither, not yet anyway!!

#### don carter

TNX rknnut! And you're sure right about that! NOTHING is inexpensive about this hobby! But, I think when you see our motors and their prices, you're going to be pleasantly surprised. That is if you buy from a current motor manufacturer. I don't know where you buy your motors and I don't care. Maybe you make your own. But I can tell you this. If you're buying from a motor manufacturer, I can tell you we're going to knock the socks off their prices. THAT'S a promise!

##### I don't do spirals
TRF Supporter
TNX rknnut! And you're sure right about that! NOTHING is inexpensive about this hobby! But, I think when you see our motors and their prices, you're going to be pleasantly surprised. That is if you buy from a current motor manufacturer. I don't know where you buy your motors and I don't care. Maybe you make your own. But I can tell you this. If you're buying from a motor manufacturer, I can tell you we're going to knock the socks off their prices. THAT'S a promise!
We all look forward to it. Until you can provide details (motor data, thrust curves, PRICES), please, I'm begging you, shush. Answer questions and, if you don't have an answer, just say so.

EDIT: I would bet the vast majority of us here don't give a flying F\$ about your HAM experience. Stay on point.

Last edited:

#### hobie1dog

Hi Hobie. Nope. Haven't read your page on qrz just yet. Glad you found me. How long did you say you've been a ham? I've been a ham since 1983 when I got my original call sign KC4KGD. Sometimes I wish I had kept it but a call sign with an N in the beginning is a sort of a rarity anyway these days. It's pretty good for working CW. Do you work much CW? I have several keys but I usually use my straight key. I don't work fast CW must. Usually 12-15 WPM is about what I do. Even slower if I'm talking to a new ham who is just getting into CW. It's sort of a dying art but I love the nostalgia.
Don: This part of the thread is much more enjoyable for both of us instead of the negativity of the safety Nazis and Armchair Engineers I got licensed in 2013 and have never learned CW, but I do have a mfj paddle that another ham friend of mine gave me to practice with, but I really only have practiced my call sign. I did fall in love at the Dayton Hamvention when I stopped by the Begali key table and tried out all of their keys as they are the Rolls-Royce of keys.

#### Thundercloud

##### Well-Known Member
When I was first getting into HPR back in the 1980's, I gave Don a call. He gave me a screamin' deal on a fairly large quantity of plugged single use motors. I mostly remember 29mm 240NS H motors, and 1-5/8" full H's. At the time, you could actually buy cardboard motor mount tubing for his 1-5/8" motors. I certified in the fall of 1989 in Danville Illinois on one of his H motors. It was awesome to have dozens of motors to fly at will.

#### don carter

Hobie. Those armchair Nazi's don't bother me. It comes with the territory. I chalk it up to jealousy. Most are either wanna-be motor manufacturers and don't have the money or brains to do so, or are simply naysayers. No big deal. I'm a positive person. I like positive people. Those who aren't, I typically brush off.

Begali keys are wonderful! They ARE indeed the "king of keys." I use a Bencher straight key. I have numerous other keys, but that one if my favorite.

Thundercloud!! Yes! Those "H" motors we made and sold were great! And good sellers too! They were plugged as you said. We never made motors with delays. Too many problems. But the motors we DID manufacture were great motors and worked well. Not only that Thundercloud, but the prices were outstanding! We scared the pants off every other motor manufacturer! Thanks for the mention of our motors! I appreciate you!! It's people like you and others who make it all worthwhile!

#### boatgeek

##### Well-Known Member
Those armchair Nazi's don't bother me. It comes with the territory. I chalk it up to jealousy. Most are either wanna-be motor manufacturers and don't have the money or brains to do so, or are simply naysayers. No big deal. I'm a positive person. I like positive people. Those who aren't, I typically brush off.
I mean, nothing says cheerful positivity like Godwin's Law and name-calling.

Seriously, spend half the time you're here complaining about the Nazis and wanna-bes on either a sketch of the igniter options or your patent application so you can release the sketch later. That would resolve about 80% of the questions here. A set of notional thrust curves and a test fire photo wouldn't hurt either. Nethier of the latter would get into IP issues at all. And before you ask, I did say in the now-deleted thread that I might be a customer. I still might, though I have a lot concerns about how warranty claims will be handled...

#### Johnly

##### Well-Known Member
Don,
NAR S&T is willing sign a NDA with your company if you would like your igniter design evaluated for compliance to NFPA 1125/1127 by NFPA committee members.

John Lyngdal
NAR S&T Committee Chairman
NFPA PYR-AAA Committee Member

#### Arpak

##### Well-Known Member
though I have a lot concerns about how warranty claims will be handled...
That's exactly what a *nabob* would say.

/S

Status
Not open for further replies.