Looking for info on an G80 motor I was given

[Bill S]

I was the lucky recipient of a gifted Aerotech G80-7 motor at a launch yesterday - the guy didn't need it anymore, and as I think it will work on a scratchbuild I am getting ready to build... nice score.

I notice that it appears to be rather old, with the old copperhead igniter, and no thrust ring.

I am wondering:

How old is this likely to be? There is no lot# or date on the motor, but the packaging says copyrighted 1989.

Should I bother trying to figure out how to use the single lead igniter, and if so, how do you use it? If not, what is the best choice? I've got some Aerotech First Fire Jr igniters, which appear to be suitable.

Any issues or gotchas I should be aware of with this motor? I figured that I'd have to add a tape thrust ring, which is no problem as I already do that with my Estes black powder E16s.

Picture of the motor in question:

 

[David Schwantz]

That igniter needs a special clip. The first fires should work fine. For a thrust ring, you can wrap a few turns of tape at the base of the motor.

 

[fyrwrxz]

+1^
Tape thrust rings are common on the 'old' motors. I use 1/4 masking or painter's tape. For the much reviled copperhead, remember both sides are conductive so you put a bit of tape under the clip on one side and the opposite for the other clip. To prove how old I am, I have a roll of tractor printer paper feed strip still in my range box. Threaded the igniter thru the holes snd clipped it up. Kept forgetting to retrieve the 'special' clip from the pad. Note: Keep the red nozzle plug, cut a wedge at the bottom and put back on after you thread the ignitor in. This prevents the copperhead from pulling down or out from the weight of the clips. Put it ALL the way to the top. First fires should work fine, but beware the propellant may be oxidized. A long, thin flat bladed electrician's screw driver may be needed to score a better surface. Check also to make sure the paper cap hasn't lifted, losing your ejection charge. If it's loose, add bp and tape down.

 

[mikec]

The first thing I would do is see if you can actually get an igniter into the motor. And I wouldn't mess with the Copperhead if you've never seen one before and have alternatives.

I'm not sure how old this is, but from the packaging it could be from the early 2000s or even older. It's from before they even added the propellant type suffix and they at one point made a White Lightning motor called a G80 ( http://www.nar.org/pdf/Aerotech/G80.pdf ) so there's no telling exactly what this is.

 

[Johnly]

This likely a standard G80T, rather than the FWL variant, as the G80FWL were sold without the roll printing on the case.
Back in the days of Magnum, Ross would somehow place a bulk order for the G80FWL motors and quantity price them under $10 each.
I've fired 15 year old Aerotech Blue Thunder motors on the test stand and their performance was nominal. This one might be older than that, so your results may be different.

John Lyngdal
NAR Standards & Testing

 

[tsmith1315]

That igniter needs a special clip. The first fires should work fine. For a thrust ring, you can wrap a few turns of tape at the base of the motor.

I never used the clip for Copperheads, just use a razor knife to separate the two layers and peel them apart for the first couple inches. Remove any copper hairs from the edge that could short the layers and connect alligator clips directly. Despite their reputation, I always found them perfectly reliable for mid power, but never tried the HPR versions.



I used one last year on the old green G-something reload it came with!

@mikec is right, first check to see if the igniter will go in. I have an old single use E now that's just a momento because I can't get an igniter into it.

 

[3stoogesrocketry]

Tsmith beat me to it . Another way to do it is with a lighter . There is a very thin film separating the two layers of copper. Where he cut it , you can quickly heat up with a lighter and it will separate like in the photo . Copper heads work great in big motors too . The only thing you need to watch out for is not hitting it with to much voltage as i've found 16 to 18 volts can fry the jumper without lighting the pyrogen .

 

[Bill S]

Thanks guys for the info. I think I will just use a more modern igniter and skip the provided old igniter.

 

[Initiator001]

That G80 was packaged in early 1990.
I can tell because the printing on the motor description label is small.
It was quickly decided that the label needed a larger font so new labels were made and used.
There is a possibility that I was the one who packaged that motor.

This G80 is one of the original 120 N-sec total impulse motors and NOT the current 137 N-Sec total impulse motor.

 

[kuririn]

For the much reviled copperhead, remember both sides are conductive so you put a bit of tape under the clip on one side and the opposite for the other clip.

+1. Done it this way, no special clip or peeling apart necessary.
Never had a problem with the copperheads.
Or the tiger tails for that matter, which were the Quest equivalent for low power BP motors.

 

[jimzcatz]

Deleted due to redundancy. I still cant believe this forum gets away without a delete post option!!!

 

[Bill S]

That G80 was packaged in early 1990.
I can tell because the printing on the motor description label is small.
It was quickly decided that the label needed a larger font so new labels were made and used.
There is a possibility that I was the one who packaged that motor.

This G80 is one of the original 120 N-sec total impulse motors and NOT the current 137 N-Sec total impulse motor.

Thanks for the information. That is interesting. I assume you worked for Aerotech in the 90s?

 

[rharshberger]

Deleted due to redundancy. I still cant believe this forum gets away without a delete post option!!!

It was abused in the past, and has been removed/diabled. Entire threads of relevant information were lost when an individual got pissed and deleted all their posting, sure lots of info was still there but it lost context rendering it of limited use.

 

[Antares JS]

What fyrwrxz and kuririn said. The special clip made them more convenient but it was not necessary. You put a little piece of tape on one side of the igniter without covering the other side, put a clip over the tape so the metal only contacts one side of the igniter. Then do the same thing on another spot on the igniter, but put the tape on the other side from the first piece of tape. They worked fine when you knew how to use them.

That said, copperheads had some weird design decisions and I'm not sure what Aerotech was thinking when they came out with them. Needing a special clip or having to hassle with wiring it up a special way doesn't seem conducive to happy flyers.

 

[CoyoteNumber2]

@Initiator001, do you know how many G80FWL production runs were made? My dad and I bought some in '97 or '98, but then never saw them again.

 

[Initiator001]

Thanks for the information. That is interesting. I assume you worked for Aerotech in the 90s?

1987-1993. With some 'interruptions' between those dates.

 

[Initiator001]

@Initiator001, do you know how many G80FWL production runs were made? My dad and I bought some in '97 or '98, but then never saw them again.

No. Those motors came out after my time with AeroTech.

 

[Initiator001]

That said, copperheads had some weird design decisions and I'm not sure what Aerotech was thinking when they came out with them. Needing a special clip or having to hassle with wiring it up a special way doesn't seem conducive to happy flyers.

The Copperhead igniters were developed to confront the issue of "My micro-clips keep shorting when they touch the blast deflector, launch rod, each other" and "My igniter leads twist and short out". The idea was to make rocket motor ignition more successful for more people.

Rocketeers were/are too hung up on the idea that there needed to be TWO clips to an igniter and resisted change.
As was written in a NAR Section Newsletter Product Review about the Copperheads, "Current igniter technology (Estes Solar Igniters) is based on one year of development and thirty years of use. Copperhead igniters are based on thirty years of development and one year of use".

I like Copperheads. They worked well for me.

Another benefit of Copperhead igniters were in clustering motors. Scott Pearce came up with a way to make multiple 'heads' on a single piece of Copperhead material. One could cluster 2-3-4 motors and only need one Copperhead Clip to ignite them all. I used such a cluster Copperhead igniter to start two Apogee B7 13mm motors for a 'C' Eggloft duration event at a NAR contest. Worked perfectly, both motors ignited simultaneously.

Copperheads went away when the manufacturer of the copper laminate material stopped making it.

 

[Antares JS]

The Copperhead igniters were developed to confront the issue of "My micro-clips keep shorting when they touch the blast deflector, launch rod, each other" and "My igniter leads twist and short out". The idea was to make rocket motor ignition more successful for more people.

Rocketeers were/are too hung up on the idea that there needed to be TWO clips to an igniter and resisted change.
As was written in a NAR Section Newsletter Product Review about the Copperheads, "Current igniter technology (Estes Solar Igniters) is based on one year of development and thirty years of use. Copperhead igniters are based on thirty years of development and one year of use".

I like Copperheads. They worked well for me.

Another benefit of Copperhead igniters were in clustering motors. Scott Pearce came up with a way to make multiple 'heads' on a single piece of Copperhead material. One could cluster 2-3-4 motors and only need one Copperhead Clip to ignite them all. I used such a cluster Copperhead igniter to start two Apogee B7 13mm motors for a 'C' Eggloft duration event at a NAR contest. Worked perfectly, both motors ignited simultaneously.

Copperheads went away when the manufacturer of the copper laminate material stopped making it.

Interesting to know, thanks. I believe this was before my time though. I turned 18 in 2005 and I think copperheads were on their way out by then. I flew a few of them before they were completely gone and thought they were fine, if weird.

 

[n3tjm]

That is the Classic G80 Blue Thunder. 120 n/s. Loved how big the nozzle looked . It's claim to fame was the Thump! it made at liftoff. I loved that motor in my Initiator. Another good thing about Blue Thunder is it ages well. Unless the motor was stored in a very humid environment, it will ignite instantly even with that supplied crapperhead igniter.

As mentioned before, use the lighter trick to seperate the leads, or use the tape trick. Both work fine,.

 

[mikec]

The Copperhead igniters were developed to confront the issue of "My micro-clips keep shorting when they touch the blast deflector, launch rod, each other"

Certainly this was well-intentioned, but some fraction of shipped Copperheads had a short in the copper laminate where it was hard to see and fix. Sure, there were ways to repair this.

I flew a lot of them and they weren't unusable, but I don't miss them at all.

 

[smstachwick]

I recall flying a handful of F and G motors with my dad around the 2004-2009 timeframe. I recall being mighty confused by how the Copperheads worked for those and him having to complete the setup on the pad.

I could probably figure it out now that I'm older, but I think younger fliers accustomed to Estes stuff would still have trouble with them if they were still around today.

 

[AeroTech]

What fyrwrxz and kuririn said. The special clip made them more convenient but it was not necessary. You put a little piece of tape on one side of the igniter without covering the other side, put a clip over the tape so the metal only contacts one side of the igniter. Then do the same thing on another spot on the igniter, but put the tape on the other side from the first piece of tape. They worked fine when you knew how to use them.

That said, copperheads had some weird design decisions and I'm not sure what Aerotech was thinking when they came out with them. Needing a special clip or having to hassle with wiring it up a special way doesn't seem conducive to happy flyers.

They were very inexpensive to produce at a time when we were trying to cut as many costs as possible to make motors more affordable. Two-wire igniters remain far more costly to manufacture, like by a factor of 10X or more. The Copperhead clip made them more reliable too.

 

[Sandy H.]

I prefer 2 wire igniters, but have used the masking tape method with copperheads with high success. Basically, if the motor was fairly new (1-2 years) I'd claim 90%+ success using just tape to adapt to conventional launch systems. If the motors were old, success went way down, but in all fairness, 2-wire igniters were also less successful for me.

I think the best solution is to buy motors and fly motors. Buy and store for years just wasted time for good flights. In my case at least.

I think the principle of the copperhead igniter is great, especially if it was significantly less expensive. I think it was less intuitive for people at first (especially if you didn't have the clip) but once you know the tape method (or the split method) they were fine in general. I appreciate the effort to think outside the box and lower the cost. Edsel was cool too, but never caught on. Possibly before its time.

Sandy.

 

[Tom Flint]

I still have 53 of those G80 motors that are 29 years old. They still ignite easily and burn nominally during the thrust phase, but the delays tend to be wildly inaccurate on the long side after all those years of storage. I fly them with electronic ejection so the delay issue is not a problem.

 

[tomsteve]

I still have 53 of those G80 motors that are 29 years old.

FYI- the Loc Ultimate can help you with your supply of G80s.