L2 cert approach

[RocketDestroyer]

It is a bit strange to me, but absolutely allowed by the rules, that some people want to push their limits in multiple ways on any particular launch - certification or not. I absolutely understand and agree on a person pushing themselves to become educated and to learn techniques, but pushing their ability on a launch seems off to me.

This makes no sense to me. If no one ever flew a rocket that pushed their limits few of us would ever fly anything.

 

[JohnCoker]

He asks what YOU would do not what HE/SHE or someone else should do.
I selected DD and qualified that with my experience of using DD in a number of rockets and many flights.

Unfortunately there a (short) limit on the length of the poll question. But yes, I did mean what people did or planned to do themselves.

 

[thzero]

Well I had answered the the poll the same way I achieved L2 over the weekend,

Dual-deploy: full electronic recovery with 2 events​

 

[Chris_H]

L1 rocket would only fly on a very few (one) L1 motor, an I600. It was a redundant dual deploy that was built to L3 spec, aside from a 54mm motor tube.
L2 is the same bird, which, got rebuilt into a 75mm motor mount that can fly a 5120 motor. No significant changes to electronics.
Final L3 rocket was an Ultimate Wildman, after a failed attempt on a scratch build 4" / 75mm bird. Failure was due to CATO, under warranty by CTI, M2275. UW first flight with L1395 was perfect, second flight on M1265 was not, blew main at the top. Third flight passed.

Build what you are comfortable with.

 

[stealth6]

I decided to go "full L2" for my cert flight.........Loki K350 Moonburner motor with an altitude of 11,761 feet.
It was full electronic dual deploy (with a backup altimeter), and tracking.

s6

 

[boatgeek]

This makes no sense to me. If no one ever flew a rocket that pushed their limits few of us would ever fly anything.

I think the distinction is whether you're pushing several limits in a single flight and especially pushing several limits on a cert flight. For example, you should probably be comfortable with electronic deployment before you try a high-power staged rocket with electronic deployment.

 

[stealth6]

I may be an outlier here, but I've never understood the fear of electronic ejection (as opposed to motor eject). It seems lots of folks are mixing up "safety & reliability" and "simplicity". Sure, in some ways motor eject is simpler, and I do understand the basic idea of "keeping things simple". But in my mind I have WAY more confidence in "things going right" when using electronic ejection. I have way more "fear" of a badly timed ejection - causing all sorts of things that will lead to failure - when relying on motor ejection. Not to mention that calculating a properly timed motor eject is fairly complicated, and almost always involves a few compromises and an acceptance that the actual timing of the event will at best be close to optimal (as opposed to just at the right moment.... which is pretty easy to do with an altimeter). Limited delay time options on some motors, and the absolute "approximate guess" that is the reality of drilling delay grains accurately, mean that motor eject is more akin to crossing my fingers and hoping it works okay.

For me, motor eject is great for smaller rockets/motors and lower altitudes ("woosh pop" flights) - but when I'm going high, and something like an L2 cert is on the line, give me the safety, confidence, reliability, and yes simplicity of electronic ejection every time.

 

[Chris_H]

I may be an outlier here, but I've never understood the fear of electronic ejection (as opposed to motor eject). It seems lots of folks are mix up "safety & reliability" and "simplicity". Sure, in some ways motor eject is simpler, and I do understand the basic idea of "keeping things simple". But in my mind I have WAY more confidence in "things going right" when using electronic ejection. I have way more "fear" of a badly timed ejection - causing all sorts of things that will lead to failure - when relying on motor ejection. Not to mention that calculating a properly timed motor eject is fairly complicated, and almost always involves a few compromises and an acceptance that the actual timing of the event will at best be close to optimal (as opposed to just at the right moment.... which is pretty easy to do with an altimeter). Limited delay time options on some motors, and the absolute "approximate guess" that is the reality of drilling delay grains accurately, mean that motor eject is more akin to crossing my fingers and hoping it works okay.

For me, motor eject is great for smaller rockets/motors and lower altitudes ("woosh pop" flights) - but when I'm going high, and something like an L2 cert is on the line, give me the safety, confidence, reliability, and yes simplicity of electronic ejection every time.

100%
And I have no interest in learning motor delays. It is a different game. Much respect to those who do.
Completely different game. Electronics make sense to me. I would not have entered into HPR if it were all motor delay.. Electronic control is part of the draw.

 

[TheTank]

I may be an outlier here, but I've never understood the fear of electronic ejection (as opposed to motor eject). It seems lots of folks are mixing up "safety & reliability" and "simplicity". Sure, in some ways motor eject is simpler, and I do understand the basic idea of "keeping things simple". But in my mind I have WAY more confidence in "things going right" when using electronic ejection. I have way more "fear" of a badly timed ejection - causing all sorts of things that will lead to failure - when relying on motor ejection. Not to mention that calculating a properly timed motor eject is fairly complicated, and almost always involves a few compromises and an acceptance that the actual timing of the event will at best be close to optimal (as opposed to just at the right moment.... which is pretty easy to do with an altimeter). Limited delay time options on some motors, and the absolute "approximate guess" that is the reality of drilling delay grains accurately, mean that motor eject is more akin to crossing my fingers and hoping it works okay.

For me, motor eject is great for smaller rockets/motors and lower altitudes ("woosh pop" flights) - but when I'm going high, and something like an L2 cert is on the line, give me the safety, confidence, reliability, and yes simplicity of electronic ejection every time.

^^ This 100%.

 

[Hobie1dog]

For me, motor eject is great for smaller rockets/motors and lower altitudes ("woosh pop" flights)

I'll be thinking of this for every LPR launch, for the rest of my life.

 

[KenECoyote]

I did the insane YOLO approach for my L2 by taking a 4" X-15 kit that was HED (and the designer himself told me can NOT be made DD) and making it DD, finishing the build at an insane pace and certifying L2 with it as the last flight for our club for the season (reason for the rush...plus the launch was a week earlier than I thought lol). However, the flight was fabulous, beautiful and so worth it.
Pic after it earned its paint:

Often the more you put into something, the more you get back...and keep.