None were designed for it but several rockets at a launch I 'taped' came down this way. By far the largest and most elegant was this one -
Last edited:
Horizontal Spin Recovery - with Magnus Effect?
- Thread starter Dotini
- Start date
Help Support The Rocketry Forum:
Not only elegant, but excellent duration and highly desirable spiraling descent keeping it close to the pad. Ten or more consecutive flights like this without damage is our design goal.
lakeroadster
When in doubt... build hell-for-stout!
That Sir is awesome! The recovery was amazing and the slow motion video... that audio with the deep low tone rumble... pretty cool.
I can't take credit for the recovery, but I've spent the last year working out how to get rockets on video. One is not too bad (phone or GoPro near the pad and remoted), getting all of them from a launch event is a lot more challenging and I'm still working on it (and trying to avoid the next step, which would be another 5k invested in cameras instead of new countertops/flooring).
Lots more (including a couple of horizontal descents) at
Over the next week and a half I have about 100 more to post from the event.
Lots more (including a couple of horizontal descents) at
Over the next week and a half I have about 100 more to post from the event.
Here we have two new fin cans for comparative tests on two new HSR models. It is also being discussed that these fin cans could later be two-staged.
Fin roots have been reinforced with strips made from Apogee Airframe Sleeve 24 AS 24/4. Fins were tacked on with Bob Smith medium CA, then filleted with JB Weld 15 minute epoxy.
Fin roots have been reinforced with strips made from Apogee Airframe Sleeve 24 AS 24/4. Fins were tacked on with Bob Smith medium CA, then filleted with JB Weld 15 minute epoxy.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 11,624
- Reaction score
- 6,265
Very nice. Are the wooden fillets aka cheaters becoming a standard mounting technique?
A man can hope. If they survive 20 landing without failure, then maybe so!
Two new HSR models ready for testing at 60 Acres as soon as Sunday.
"Cyclops" on right with 1/4" puffer hole in nose cone.
"Cyclops" on right with 1/4" puffer hole in nose cone.
lakeroadster
When in doubt... build hell-for-stout!
Long and Lean, and not much In-Between. Should be awesome.
Yes, long and lean! To be precise, we will be evaluating l/w ratios of 48:1 and 43:1, as well as alternative placements of the 1/4" ID puffer port. Refinements of the CG being looked at are between 69% and 72% of the distance from the tip of the nose cone to the C/G, measured with an expended motor installed.
These models are very light, and will launch on anything between a B4 and a D12. Either can be fitted with a booster for two-stage flights. A miniaturized altimeter will eventually be installed.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2017
- Messages
- 1,918
- Reaction score
- 807
Your high level of quality/workmanship is really impressive.
Thank you very greatly, but you are perhaps too kind. My models are quite humble compared to the masterpieces evident in this forum alone. But yes, after going through 100 X-acto blades and 50 cans of paint, a guy ought to be able to build a decent model. Or, as the old Slavic proverb goes, "One cannot plant a million seeds without harvesting at least one potato".
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 11,624
- Reaction score
- 6,265
Great minds think alike.
The “Cyclops” has worked for me well.
I’m curious of the aerodynamic cost of decapitating the nose cone. I don’t think it will have a functionally significant effect on CP simply because these are inherently SuperRocs. Something tells me that none of the sim programs are gonna work to calculate drag (although @neil_w often proves me wrong and reminds me how lazy I am in not learning OR!). So any drag studies would likely have to be empiric. In this case possibly irrelevant as not sure you really care how high it goes as long as it stays in sight and gives some time to appreciate the cool recovery.
Where do you put the altimeter? The normal nose position seems likely to cause CG issues.
I would imagine that the cut-off nose would perhaps add a bit of drag, but of course impossible to know exactly without a wind tunnel. I mean, no air will flow in so it acts like a snub-nose.
And yes, you should learn OR.
We also want to know if the hole in the nose adds drag, so we made an identical replacement test section (blue nose cone as seen above) with the hole conventionally in the side rather than the nose. Until we get the mini altimeter installed, we will measure altitude and duration with the Estes Alti-Trak and video camera/timer which we incorporated into the Alti-Trak. On previous models with the angled ejection ports just aft of the CG, we put the altimeter very near the CG.
We fully share your nose drag conjectures, but will make sure empirically. We also have the option to cover the hole on launch with a paper or tape aero cap/cover.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 11,624
- Reaction score
- 6,265
unless it’s a cone shaped cover, not sure a flat “manhole cover” over the hole will make any difference.
OTOH, would be easy to use chewing gum, play dough, or something to create disposable “cone-let” that would easily eject, to maintain the optimal aerodynamics on boost.
Last edited:
At a launch yesterday, a rocket suffered a separation, with the nose cone and payload coming down on the parachute. The lower section came down doing a great horizontal spin. So, are the curved fins really necessary?
There are numerous anecdotal reports of rockets accidentally descending as you note. However, here we are trying to make the HSR process 100% predictable, repeatable and reliable, and without ejecting the nose cone.
But to answer your question directly, no, curved fins per se are not necessary.
Below we see Van Milligan's suggested method with an angle incorporated into each flat fin, from the very first post of this thread.
Figure 13
https://www.apogeerockets.com/education/downloads/Newsletter447.pdf
Below we see my first attempt at building an HSR model, from page 1 of this thread.
It will be seen that the fins are not curved, but have 90 degree endplates on one side of each fin.
The bottom line is that for HSR to be reliable and consistent with each and every launch, a means must be found to ensure reliable spin on each descent.
