Quantcast

Hyperloc 835 owners... help a guy out?

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

Coop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
3
As my rocketry pursuits continue, I find myself in need of a simple test mule with dual deployment capabilities. The LOC Hyperloc 835 seems to fit the bill for my needs, and I've already got the Eye Roll of Understanding --which is completely different from the Eye Roll of You Better Not-- from Nikki, so... off we go.

I'd like something 4" diameter, dual-deployment ready from "jump," light enough for I's, with greater capacity for later on once testing is complete where I'm flying it just for kicks. I have a couple of rockets in this overall range, but I don't want to use those for this purpose--they're my kids rockets, and I'm not going to use the kid's rockets as initial test beds... at least until I have everything well understood and characterized. 7 lbs or so is ideal.

So... Hyperloc 835 owners... can you tell me about your bird? What modifications have you made? Glass added? What do you recover it on, and how are your landing speeds with that? How much does she weigh, and would you recommend this, or some other kit?

Yes, kit. I'm capable to scratch build to my needs, but I tend to get attached to the ones I design and build much more than the kits, and given that this is going to (initially) be a test mule, I don't want that attachment, understand.

Photos are always welcome... thanks in advance!


Later!

--Coop
 

cavecentral

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
3,129
Reaction score
25
I have a 3" dia Hyperloc that I flew on an I65 with a DD option. The ebay is a bit heavy compared to stock for such a light motor. Guessing 5-6K (got back a year later - lost and found). Also flew it on a 54mm 3gr Orange Sunset to 6K.

I did a 3" and 4" dia scatch built as my test birds for research motors. 38mm mounts, DD, and flew great on 3- 6 grain 38mm motors. Mostly in the 2500'.

The EZI-65 4" or Caliber-ISP 3" would fit the bill too. All nice DD capable rocket that are light (cardboard) and will do pretty well.

I did friction fit (vs. Shear pins). With bolts / clips for retention. Rail buttons and swapped elastic for TN. Put an Eye-bolt in the nose cone.
 

neond7

Sky Pirate
TRF Supporter
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
1,226
Reaction score
11
I build a Hyperloc 835 a few years ago. It was fully glassed. Here is the build thread: http://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?55756-HYPERLOC-835-BUILD

To be honest, this isn't my favorite rocket to fly. Because of the extra long body tube to accommodate hybrid motors, along with what I believe is undersized fins, this rocket seems to love heading off downrange and I end up with a very long walk every time regardless of the wind conditions.

You had asked for recommendations, I would definitely recommend the Binder Design Excel dual deploy. I've flown both of mine many times on "I" and "J" motors. Always arrow straight flights. I do recommend adding a third centering ring and a longer motor tube (make it 16 inches) - this will allow you to easily reach the top of the centering ring to attach the recovery harness. If you order the kit, you can request this mod, Mike Fischer was great to work with. I ended up building most of the kits from Binder Design.

Here is the build thread for my Excel: http://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?36054-Binder-Design-54mm-Excel-Dual-Deploy-Kit

Good luck picking out a kit! Let us know what you choose.
 

Coop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
3
Thanks, Kevin!

I was giving the EZI-65 a look, too. I'm playing more with recovery testing than motors --still haven't gotten around to research motor making. I've been lurking in the research forum for at least a couple years, here, but tend those endeavors to those more knowledgeable in that area than I...

Rail buttons and some TN or TK is pretty much a given for me, too. I've used eye bolts into the plastic noses in the past with good success, but honestly, anymore, I just drill two holes and feed the shock cord through 'em unless I want a bit more weight up front.

I'm planning on streamer at apogee to bring her in ~ 80 FPS or so until main deploy (thinking my 15 or 18" will do). Want to hook it up with some decent data logging capability --accellerometers as well as baros-- and probably work in telemetry as well.


Later!

--Coop
 

Coop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
3
I build a Hyperloc 835 a few years ago. It was fully glassed. Here is the build thread: http://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?55756-HYPERLOC-835-BUILD

To be honest, this isn't my favorite rocket to fly. Because of the extra long body tube to accommodate hybrid motors, along with what I believe is undersized fins, this rocket seems to love heading off downrange and I end up with a very long walk every time regardless of the wind conditions.

You had asked for recommendations, I would definitely recommend the Binder Design Excel dual deploy. I've flown both of mine many times on "I" and "J" motors. Always arrow straight flights. I do recommend adding a third centering ring and a longer motor tube (make it 16 inches) - this will allow you to easily reach the top of the centering ring to attach the recovery harness. If you order the kit, you can request this mod, Mike Fischer was great to work with. I ended up building most of the kits from Binder Design.

Here is the build thread for my Excel: http://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?36054-Binder-Design-54mm-Excel-Dual-Deploy-Kit

Good luck picking out a kit! Let us know what you choose.
Thanks, Jeff! I appreciate the info!

I was actually on the Binder Design site... yesterday, I believe, and looked at a few of the kits they offer.

The Excel DD you mentioned... what's the finished weight on that (I'll be checking out your build threads as time permits)?

Later!

--Coop
 

cavecentral

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
3,129
Reaction score
25
Thanks, Kevin!

I was giving the EZI-65 a look, too. I'm playing more with recovery testing than motors --still haven't gotten around to research motor making. I've been lurking in the research forum for at least a couple years, here, but tend those endeavors to those more knowledgeable in that area than I...

Rail buttons and some TN or TK is pretty much a given for me, too. I've used eye bolts into the plastic noses in the past with good success, but honestly, anymore, I just drill two holes and feed the shock cord through 'em unless I want a bit more weight up front.

I'm planning on streamer at apogee to bring her in ~ 80 FPS or so until main deploy (thinking my 15 or 18" will do). Want to hook it up with some decent data logging capability --accellerometers as well as baros-- and probably work in telemetry as well.


Later!

--Coop
The 3" models seem a little more robust. Yeah drilling 2 holes in the nose works great - just not the little L molded on the cone. 4" is more room for recovery / electronics.

I'd stay away from anything with fins swept back below the body for 'recovery testing.' Even go forward swept.

Guessing you want light for cheaper to fly (29mm 4gr or 38mm 3gr options) instead of needing a J to get the thing in the air.
 

Crash-n-Burn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Messages
379
Reaction score
1
I think you should give the HyperLOC 835 a go. I built mine with wood glue, no glassing and it has flown great. Nice straight flights, handled a K513 without issue. I didn't use shear pins on mine, just a good friction fit has worked at the separation points. For the main I use what it came with in the kit - don't remember the size offhand - but since I built stock I didn't need to upscale the chute. The only issue I had was that my fins were warped and unusable, but a quick call to Barry sorted that out. I've flown I-195 as the smallest motor in this bird.

That said... if this is a test vehicle for dual deploy then it may not survive a mistake. Perhaps a fg dd rocket would be more forgiving in the event something goes awry.
 

BalDave2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2012
Messages
125
Reaction score
0
I did my L1 (I-195R) and L2 (J-595B) on the same, stock-built HyperLOC 8<script id="gpt-impl-0.42392149020916236" src="http://partner.googleadservices.com/gpt/pubads_impl_105.js"></script>35 and highly recommend it! I had flown it on all sorts of commercial and research motors and it always flew great. It was a real workhorse and the favorite rocket in my fleet. If you wanted to save weight/length, you could always not add the coupled section to the booster. I ended up losing it in a tree on a real windy day or else it would still be seeing regular flights. I built it with JB Weld but wood glue should be fine. I have used both shear pins and friction fit. I have gone solely with shear pins as it is more reliable to not accidentally deploy from the force of the apogee ejection event.
[video=youtube;ZND0uIvUpsQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZND0uIvUpsQ[/video]
 
Last edited:

Coop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
3
The 3" models seem a little more robust. Yeah drilling 2 holes in the nose works great - just not the little L molded on the cone. 4" is more room for recovery / electronics.

I'd stay away from anything with fins swept back below the body for 'recovery testing.' Even go forward swept.

Guessing you want light for cheaper to fly (29mm 4gr or 38mm 3gr options) instead of needing a J to get the thing in the air.
Exactly--on all counts! I'd at first considered a 3" airframed-bird, but, as you said: data logging and recovery space.

I'm okay adapting up to 54mm from 29, and my ideal pad weight will be in the neighborhood of 7 lb. That'll put me up enough to obtain some speed from apogee, and pop the main in the neighborhood of ~80 FPS.


Later!

--Coop
 

Coop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
3
I think you should give the HyperLOC 835 a go. I built mine with wood glue, no glassing and it has flown great. Nice straight flights, handled a K513 without issue. I didn't use shear pins on mine, just a good friction fit has worked at the separation points. For the main I use what it came with in the kit - don't remember the size offhand - but since I built stock I didn't need to upscale the chute. The only issue I had was that my fins were warped and unusable, but a quick call to Barry sorted that out. I've flown I-195 as the smallest motor in this bird.

That said... if this is a test vehicle for dual deploy then it may not survive a mistake. Perhaps a fg dd rocket would be more forgiving in the event something goes awry.
Thanks for the info! It's much appreciated. How much did your stock-built model weigh?

Later!

--Coop
 

Coop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
3
I did my L1 (I-195R) and L2 (J-595B) on the same, stock-built HyperLOC 8<script id="gpt-impl-0.42392149020916236" src="http://partner.googleadservices.com/gpt/pubads_impl_105.js"></script>35 and highly recommend it! I had flown it on all sorts of commercial and research motors and it always flew great. It was a real workhorse and the favorite rocket in my fleet. If you wanted to save weight/length, you could always not add the coupled section to the booster. I ended up losing it in a tree on a real windy day or else it would still be seeing regular flights. I built it with JB Weld but wood glue should be fine. I have used both shear pins and friction fit. I have gone solely with shear pins as it is more reliable to not accidentally deploy from the force of the apogee ejection event.
[video=youtube;ZND0uIvUpsQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZND0uIvUpsQ[/video]
Thank you for your input--and making me aware of options on this particular model.

What does your rocket, as assembled with the JB Weld, weigh? Have you flown it in DD without one of the airframe sections? Did it work well?


I'm sure I'll wind up using shear pins to secure the nose... and probably the av-bay, weight depending.


Later!

--Coop
 

Coop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
3
+1 for binder design

The lightning bolt is similar to the hyperloc. My son put together this video of my most recent flight with it.

https://youtu.be/-w-tp6J4Ido
Very nice looking rocket, and yes, I definitely see the similarity. I've watched the video--well done! The 54mm sugar... how many Ns was that? What was the max altitude? And what does the Lightning Bolt weigh?


Later!

--Coop
 

mccordmw

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,020
Reaction score
47
Location
St. Louis, MO
Thanks for the info! It's much appreciated. How much did your stock-built model weigh?

Later!

--Coop
I did my L1 and L2 on a Binder Design Excel DD. I went with the 54mm motor mount and put in a 54>38 adapter for maximum versatility. Like you, I plan on using this as my test mount. It's light enough for some H motors with decent average impulse. I did my cert on an I242. It's tough enough (I haven't tested mine in this yet) to take K motors according to Mike Fisher.

I attached my ORK file for the model with the 54>38 adapter in the motor mount. Flies beautifully on a J330. Primed-painted weight wo/motor was 2.7 kg.

[video=youtube;DlPadVwQv5o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlPadVwQv5o[/video]

[video=youtube;z-Ft5uJAwXA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-Ft5uJAwXA&amp;t[/video]

View attachment binder_excel_dd_38mm_MWM (1).ork
 

Coop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
3
I did my L1 and L2 on a Binder Design Excel DD. I went with the 54mm motor mount and put in a 54>38 adapter for maximum versatility. Like you, I plan on using this as my test mount. It's light enough for some H motors with decent average impulse. I did my cert on an I242. It's tough enough (I haven't tested mine in this yet) to take K motors according to Mike Fisher.

I attached my ORK file for the model with the 54>38 adapter in the motor mount. Flies beautifully on a J330. Primed-painted weight wo/motor was 2.7 kg.
Thanks so much! I'll give the ORK file a lookover later this evening. I ws going to ask what kind of performance you got out of the I-242, but I see it there in your sig. I thought that was a 29mm 6XL motor... Perhaps I am thinking of something else...

Later!

--Coop
 

mccordmw

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,020
Reaction score
47
Location
St. Louis, MO
Thanks so much! I'll give the ORK file a lookover later this evening. I ws going to ask what kind of performance you got out of the I-242, but I see it there in your sig. I thought that was a 29mm 6XL motor... Perhaps I am thinking of something else...

Later!

--Coop
Here's a link to my flight data with the I242 if you want to see the detailed performance specs.
 

soopirV

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
1,156
Reaction score
6
I went the other way when I decided I wanted to build a mule to perfect my DD skills...I wanted something small and light so I can fly on F and G, up to a J if I so desired, and went with a Loc Nuke ProMax. It's a small bird, only 54mm in Dia with a 38mm hole, but the Avbay is big enough to accommodate a Eggtimer Quantum and Eggfinder. My plan is to fly it on 29mm (will get ~1200 feet on G76) to get the hang of DD, then I can stick larger loads in as I want. I fiberglassed the tubes and did TtT on the fins. Not my best glass layup, but functional.
 

Coop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
3
I went the other way when I decided I wanted to build a mule to perfect my DD skills...I wanted something small and light so I can fly on F and G, up to a J if I so desired, and went with a Loc Nuke ProMax. It's a small bird, only 54mm in Dia with a 38mm hole, but the Avbay is big enough to accommodate a Eggtimer Quantum and Eggfinder. My plan is to fly it on 29mm (will get ~1200 feet on G76) to get the hang of DD, then I can stick larger loads in as I want. I fiberglassed the tubes and did TtT on the fins. Not my best glass layup, but functional.


Your approach is sound for learning the ins and outs of dual deployment --best of luck with it! That's great that you can learn and experiment with a G... much cheaper flights! I commend you on going for the Eggtimer/finder. I've never felt strongly enough about my soldering to attempt an electronics kit such as those... that never fails to impress me, honest.

I'm not new to electronics or dual-deployment--have been flying DD for a little bit now, and feel better running electronics than I ever do cutting delay grains. However, I can see where one might reasonably deduce this as my intent.


In the interest of clarity....

The testing done with this rocket--be it one of the mentioned Binder Design models, or the Hyperlock 835, or whatever-- will be to characterize the opening sequence of parachutes deploying at reasonable (granted: a subjective term) deployment speeds. The idea: drop a 29mm I in her, lob her up ~1,500 feet or so, deploy streamer for desired opening speed at given altitude. First attempts will likely be pretty high and slower (50 FPS @ 800',) and work up in speed, and lower in opening altitude once the opening characteristics are well-understood and predictable. Key points I'll be looking at are the time from deployment to full inflation, shock at opening, as well as the descent rate under both streamer and chute.

I like the 4" airframe for this because it gives me a bit of room for the electronics, and should put me in about the right weight class where I can use my existing parachutes for testing without having to make an entire new series scaled up or down for a different weight. Of course, there's a bit of wiggle room in there. 7lb pad weight should land about 15 FPS on these chutes, if flown on a smaller I motor. I'm not keen on the idea of testing on J's, as they start getting pricey rather quickly, but I do want the option for larger J's or K's later on. I fly on the east coast... in a 7-lb rocket, a K is about as big as I'd ever go.

What caught my eye about the 835 is that it's 4", long enough for PLENTY of shock cord, recovery components, and beepy things, as well as familiarity with the LOC line. Binder Design has been mentioned a few times, and I'll be giving them strong consideration, as well as any other comparable model which seems to fit the bill--and would very much like to hear from those with models in this range... their experiences and impressions.


Later!

--Coop
 

Wizard

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
251
Reaction score
4
Two others you might consider, Madcow's 4" Super DX3 and 4" Frenzy (cardboard versions). The DX3 can be had with either a 38 or 54 mount, Frenzy is 54 only. Both fly very well, are easy to build, and in the right weight range. I have both plus several other Madcow birds, and I've never been disappointed.

David
 

Coop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
3
Two others you might consider, Madcow's 4" Super DX3 and 4" Frenzy (cardboard versions). The DX3 can be had with either a 38 or 54 mount, Frenzy is 54 only. Both fly very well, are easy to build, and in the right weight range. I have both plus several other Madcow birds, and I've never been disappointed.

David

I scanned the Madcow site briefly, but for some reason I thought they had gone all to fiberglass--and I knew that a rocket this size of FWFG is going to be too heavy... but good to know; I'll give them a deeper look --thanks!


Later!

--Coop
 

Crash-n-Burn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Messages
379
Reaction score
1
Thanks for the info! It's much appreciated. How much did your stock-built model weigh?

Later!

--Coop
Stock built weight for my 835 is 6.2 pounds for everything but the motor. Now you've got me itching for a chance to fly her again :)
 

Coop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
3
Stock built weight for my 835 is 6.2 pounds for everything but the motor. Now you've got me itching for a chance to fly her again :)
Hey, don't let ME stop you! Heheheh.

You have this set for DD? What're you running as far as electronics?



Later!

--Coop
 

BalDave2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2012
Messages
125
Reaction score
0
Thank you for your input--and making me aware of options on this particular model.

What does your rocket, as assembled with the JB Weld, weigh? Have you flown it in DD without one of the airframe sections? Did it work well?


I'm sure I'll wind up using shear pins to secure the nose... and probably the av-bay, weight depending.


Later!

--Coop
I never considered flying it without the airframe extension at the time I built it so everything was glued in place. Built weight before electronics, batteries and recovery gear was 4.8 lbs. So, Crash n Burn's 6.2 lb weight with everything except motor sounds about right. No need for shear pins in the AV bay, friction fit there is fine.
 

Coop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
3
I never considered flying it without the airframe extension at the time I built it so everything was glued in place. Built weight before electronics, batteries and recovery gear was 4.8 lbs. So, Crash n Burn's 6.2 lb weight with everything except motor sounds about right. No need for shear pins in the AV bay, friction fit there is fine.
Excellent--thanks so much!


Later!

--Coop
 

neond7

Sky Pirate
TRF Supporter
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
1,226
Reaction score
11
Not sure about your deployment speed testing, I fly naked (no Drogue) and blow main chute at 700 ft. Over 100 dual deploy flights.... never any damage due to main deployment. The electronics deploy at apogee, so no damage there either..... that is the beauty of electronics controlling events.... they happen right on time. :)
 

Coop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
3
True--they do--that's why I love 'em!

I'm not concerned about the timing as I am the force generated by the main as it inflates --not for determining the strength of the main so much as how many G's it is putting on the rest of the system, if that makes sense...


When I said "time to chute inflation," above, I meant the time from ejection until it is fully inflated and you can see the descent rate change on the graph (the altimeter's sample rate will affect, yes). Chutes that inherently open faster (smaller delay from ejection to slower speed) place more shock on the system than those that open more slowly. Like when you're driving along at 70 MPH (102 FPS) and have to jam on the brakes because traffic, soon as you get over the hill, is at a 10 MPH (smidgeon less than 15 FPS). I'd rather ease on the brakes than jam them. Even at 300 foot deployment, I should have time to delpoy gently.

I've flown drogueless in the past, but I prefer the streamer. It makes it easier to track and makes the descent rate predictable.


Later!

--Coop
 
Last edited:

Handeman

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
7,734
Reaction score
334
Location
Stafford, VA
I have a scratch built similar to the 4" hyperloc. I use two layers of 6 oz on the tube, tip to tip on the fins. It's got longer tubes than the Hyperloc, it's almost 96" tall. Weight without motors is about 10 lbs. I've flown it on I211W AT motors and get a consistent 1100 ft. I pop the main at 400 just because that's the lowest available on the HiAlt45 I got when I built it. It is a zipperless design so the lower BT is attached to the av-bay and the fincan blows off at apogee. (I wouldn't bother with a zipperless design on a DD rocket again, but I built it 7 years ago, it's got 35 flights on it so far).

I also used this rocket as a test bed for a while with an RC controlled main chute. My advice is if you want to measure opening force, time etc. for a chute, you have to develop a consistent profile for the drogue part of the flight. If you use a large enough drogue to keep the fincan well below the payload and get a consistent profile, you might not have enough vertical speed to give you the chute opening data you want. Too small of drogue and you might end up with inconsistent positions and profiles when the main deploys.

In my case, I had pretty consistent deployment profiles but still couldn't get the RC chute to deploy reliably.

Good luck
 

Coop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
3
You raise good points--much thanks!

I'll be using streamers at apogee rather than drogue chutes--they've predictable descent rates, and far easier to visually track. I've found that the position of the streamer on the shock cord makes a bit of difference in how it all recovers--for tail down, it's got to be close enough to the main compartment to do it, but not SO close as to interfere with main deployment...

The idea is to test at what I would consider "reasonable" dual-deployment speeds. 50 FPS at minimum, at least up to 80 FPS, if not 100...

Thoughts?


Later!

--Coop
 

Handeman

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
7,734
Reaction score
334
Location
Stafford, VA
I think the maximum dd decent rate is dictated by the fin can. If you have one that is long, it can easily stay relatively flat and if it doesn't spin, the fins can work like wings and the fin can can actually fly upwind, downwind, or crosswind. It can also fall flat and spin a lot. Either way, you don't have control of those things if you don't use a larger enough drogue to keep the fin can vertical.
I think in all cases, if you want consistent drop from apogee, you have to size and position the drogue right.
 
Top