Level 3 build for LDRS 2018 (completed-vids and pics)

Tonimus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
1,511
Reaction score
11
The first parts have arrived...

(80 pound pibble for scale)
 
Last edited:

[email protected]

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
1,693
Reaction score
18
Sort of LOC Magnum shape and even a cluster! This is going to be cool. LDRS will be here before you know it good thing you're starting early.

Actually I though you already built an L3 bird a year or so ago?
 

Tonimus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
1,511
Reaction score
11
Nick, I have two L3 capable birds. A Wildman Interceptor AAD 98 and the scratch built Neutral Zone. The Neutral Zone is probably the one you're thinking of. That was basically proof of concept for this build. This won't be quite as large, but will be built using the same techniques.

Mark, I'm actually trying to figure out if Trim MonoKote is strong enough to hold up to 400 mph.
 

Wayco

Desert Rat Rocketeer
TRF Supporter
Joined
Mar 23, 2011
Messages
3,956
Reaction score
1,286
Location
Goodyear, AZ
You're gonna need a cluster to get that 80 lb. pibble off the pad!
Looking at the size of those holes in your rings, that rocket is going to cost you a lot more to feed than pibble too.
 

Nytrunner

Pop lugs, not drugs
TRF Supporter
Joined
Oct 15, 2016
Messages
8,011
Reaction score
3,760
Location
Huntsville AL
The fincan looks great, but I'm really concerned about the dog's thrust to weight ratio......I don't know any RSO that would let that one through.

Query: Is a Pibble a cross between a Pitbull and Kibble?
 

Tonimus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
1,511
Reaction score
11
Hm. I'm planning on using an M1075DM. 300 pounds initial thrust. I think he'd be stable as long as it is a calm day.
 

Tonimus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
1,511
Reaction score
11
Since I can't leave well enough alone...

All stainless hardware, setup the same way as the last testbed.


 

cherokeej

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
835
Reaction score
56
That's a sweet puppers! But the little feller does look tired.

And gentlemen, I have first hand experience that the specific impulse of the propellant produced by the southbound end of any pibble will provide plenty of thrust to weight for the astro-pup in question. You talk about clear a room... Evacuate! Whatever you do, don't cause a spark!
 
Last edited:

Tonimus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
1,511
Reaction score
11
You split the top fin with your screw in picture 1 BTW, just wanted to make sure you noticed.

Very observant. This seems to be unavoidable when putting inserts into the edge of ply. I did everything I could think of to mitigate it, but nothing worked. All of the holes are like that to some extent. However, the last rocket built with the same construction technique had the same issue and has numerous hard landings without any ill effect.

Because I'm using inserts, they have teeth that grab and are super resistant to pull-out. And since most of the joints are sandwiched between the centering rings, they have nowhere to go.
 

Tonimus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
1,511
Reaction score
11
Motor mount tubes arrived from Apogee yesterday. The 4" mmt was a tad oversized compared to the spec online, but since I peeled the glassine off anyway, I just pulled a little more off. All the tubes have been cut down. I'm holding off on gluing until I hear back from my L3CC member. Better safe than sorry.
 

KenRico

'Just the Tip'
Joined
May 31, 2011
Messages
2,741
Reaction score
52
Thanks for sharing - always interesting to see how a MEGA project like this come together .

What kind of electronics are you planning to use ?

Kenny
 

Tonimus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
1,511
Reaction score
11
Kenny, I've been using Eggtimer electronics. I've had excellent luck with them (except for the GPS function, but I'm pretty sure that is related to a hard landing I had...)
 

Tonimus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
1,511
Reaction score
11
Just an update for now. Met with my L3CC adviser. Nice guy. We talked for about 2 hours about all sorts of stuff. Anyway, he wasn't particularly thrilled with the design. He would prefer a more conservative and conventional L3 attempt. Something without fins extending past the bottom of the body tube, conventional construction techniques.

Ultimately he understands my desire to use this design for my L3 attempt. We came to an agreement that I'll document the snot out of the build, fly it on a K or L motor and prove the rocket, design, and electronics package. Afterward, I'll make my L3 attempt.

He also thinks my timeline is a little on the aggressive side to be ready for LDRS. I understand that, and logistically speaking, it can be difficult to work out doing my L3 at LDRS. Ultimately someone I may or may not have met will be the deciding factor on whether or not they'll sign off on the flight, and then there's the possibility the RSO won't like it. So for now the plan is to get my L3 cert locally. As long as everything comes together, this rocket is still coming to LDRS with me, though.
 

Tonimus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
1,511
Reaction score
11
There are two main things he wasn't thrilled with. Mainly the bolt together nature of the design and secondarily the large fins that are aft of the rear end of the body tube. I understand his hesitation, as it is his signature if it goes up on a L3 attempt and it is a bit of an odd way to assemble a rocket like this. I don't think it is unreasonable to be on the conservative side and ask that I have a test flight before stuffing a M in it.

EDIT:

Here's how the fins and body tube will interface. The body tube will slide down onto the fin can, and then about 63 screws hold the two together.


 
Last edited:

Cl(VII)

Chris Bender, Lab Rat
TRF Sponsor
Joined
Feb 22, 2013
Messages
5,042
Reaction score
1,613
Location
Garland, TX
I am all for mechanical attachment over glueing everything. I am actually more surprised that the metal angle used to bolt the fins on is ok.

Nice project, and I'll be watching with interest.
 

Tonimus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
1,511
Reaction score
11
I am all for mechanical attachment over glueing everything. I am actually more surprised that the metal angle used to bolt the fins on is ok.

Nice project, and I'll be watching with interest.

Thanks, Chris. The aluminum angle is actually aesthetic. The fins are more than strong enough by themselves. But aluminum "fillets" look cool.
 

Cl(VII)

Chris Bender, Lab Rat
TRF Sponsor
Joined
Feb 22, 2013
Messages
5,042
Reaction score
1,613
Location
Garland, TX
Thanks, Chris. The aluminum angle is actually aesthetic. The fins are more than strong enough by themselves. But aluminum "fillets" look cool.

I agree they look cool. I'm just surprised you didn't get dinged on the metal parts prohibition. If your L3CC says it's cool then great. They do look sweet.
 

Tonimus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
1,511
Reaction score
11
I agree they look cool. I'm just surprised you didn't get dinged on the metal parts prohibition. If your L3CC says it's cool then great. They do look sweet.

Did I miss that prohibition? That's a thing?

EDIT: Duh. The lightweight materials. I generally interpret that to mean aluminum is okay. Like you said, if my L3CC says it is good, than we're good.
 
Last edited:

MikeyDSlagle

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
2,579
Reaction score
564
Uh oh. Now here comes the metal parts discussion...again. Not you Chris, but someone will chime in with some nonsense about a core sample or something. It's been L3CC adviser approved already so hopefully that will stall that discussion.

This is an interesting build. I tip my hat to you sir for having the patience for all those screws. I am all for using fasteners rather than glue everything. I just lose patience with the splitting and all the aligning..ugh. I'll be watching.
 

fyrfytr310

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
1,115
Reaction score
1
No metal. Ever. Terrible design.











Just kidding. Looks cool!


Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum
 

Bat-mite

Rocketeer in MD
Joined
Dec 5, 2013
Messages
11,931
Reaction score
2,732
Location
Maryland
Does kind of raise the question ... has anyone ever been in the situation where the L3CC/TAP approved the flight, but the RSO said no?
 

fyrfytr310

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
1,115
Reaction score
1
Does kind of raise the question ... has anyone ever been in the situation where the L3CC/TAP approved the flight, but the RSO said no?

Good question. I lived in a world where the RSO was one of my TAPs. I would have been more than a little upset if he denied permission to fly :)

I'll bet it's happened though.


Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum
 

Cl(VII)

Chris Bender, Lab Rat
TRF Sponsor
Joined
Feb 22, 2013
Messages
5,042
Reaction score
1,613
Location
Garland, TX
Does kind of raise the question ... has anyone ever been in the situation where the L3CC/TAP approved the flight, but the RSO said no?

Yes. My L3CC told me about a guy who had that happen. Flyer and L3CC were good on the flight, but RSO didn't think the rocket had enough initial thrust for the conditions. I showed up at the RSO with all paperwork and wind sims in hand for just this reason.
 
Top