Need HELP with making a rocket!

[smstachwick]

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE INFORMATION!!!

I am starting with a low-power kit just to mention which is an E-class motor rocket kit recommended by people here in the UK. Link: click me!

We ordered this kit today, so it's just the waiting game now...

I will add an altimeter to this kit in the nose cone. To get and analyze data.

E motors are generally considered mid-power, although starting with a kit is preferable to going scratch-build right out the gate.

Still, I think you can do better. Something this size:



can still hurt you if it drops out of the sky in streamlined condition (which did come very close to happening to me this weekend), but it’s easier to build, finish, prep, and troubleshoot. It’s also cheap and you’ll learn much from it that you can apply to to its bigger sisters.

The Arcas will have many of the same parts, just more robust (read: with more penetration power). You really want something this size dropping through your head?



(Images from Apogee Components)

Invest a few pounds and a few hours into flying an Estes Alpha or similar. Three or four flights should do it. You’ll be glad you did.

 

[jqavins]

OK, I see that on the Open Rocket front you were way ahead of me.

This thread is bugging me.

The OP apparently starts with absolutely zero knowledge of building a rocket, but targeting a reasonably sophisticated rocket build as a school project. He has two years to do it. That's fine.

But as this thread goes on, we continue to spoon feed all manner of information to the OP, from the most basic to somewhat advanced, without yet any evidence that the OP has done much of his own research to learn stuff, or touched any form of rocket kit.

One star, do not recommend.

It is not hard to get a basic grounding in how model rocketry works. There are books (which have been recommended here), there is the NAR website, and there is just plain old reading TRF.

As far as I'm concerned, until the OP has done some of his own learning, and mastered the basics (at least in concept, if not yet in practice), we shouldn't be answering any further questions. And then the OP should build and fly a rocket kit or two (or three) to learn technique and get experience.

Again, we're talking a 2 year project. There's no big rush. The OP has plenty of time to do this properly, in a self-directed way. Of course we are here to answer specific questions as things move along, but right now we should take a break and let the OP go get started learning.

Mind you, a great deal of what most people have said os that he should do just what you're saying.To whit:

I am currently going with a 3" diameter rocket with 3-G class motors (either will use G64 or G80) making a triangle form. So will it work?

No, it won't. It might, if one were to get everything right, but a newbie such as yourself will mess some part of it up, that's as good as certain. I must repeat, really, I'm not putting you down, I'm just trying to slow you down. There are lessons we all learn the hard way, but you're heading toward learning them very hard way.

You've come here looking for advice; that's good. Until Neil's post above, I guess no one had suggested that reading lots of threads here, in LPR and MPR both, would do very well among the books that have been suggested. But the thing is, since you've come for advice, it would serve you well to take it. You've been advised by a few people that a G motor can certainly do the job you've described, so why are you picking a kit that takes three of them?! That would require HPR level 1 certification, would call for materials and construction techniques and materials beyond the MPR you came to ask about, and would very, very likely result in either a shredded rocket or a lost camera (or both).

You can build a simple small C-powered rocket kit to go to several hundred feet or more. Then concentrate on what makes that one work...

Or, even better, why it doesn't. If it does, keep trying, and keep trying until get it wrong.

Ok sure, I already have asked my teacher to order a rocket kit to understand how everything works and then after that, I will probably make a more advanced rocket later. This is the rocket kit I got recommended by a person in the UK who is a member of the Midland rocketry club.

Recommendations I got - Frangible Arcas Rocket Kit

Please have a look at it and give me some feedback!
Thank you very much for helping me!

Well, for just a quick look, I'm sure it would do to get you camera to 1500 feet. But it apparently would need a non-standard build to take a G.

Make a rocket
1) that can fly at least 1500 ft
2) should use a g-class motor
3) after that is done make an advance version of it.

that's it

Holy cow! For a first time out of the gate, the 1500 foot MPR should be step three, the advanced version of something else.

[W]hen you increase the diameter of the body tube the mass adds to the rocket therefore it does not go as high

Almost right. It's not mostly about the mass. There times that adding mass will increase the peak altitude.

Again that same thing applies to the length of the body tube

Again, the mass of the tube is not the main consideration, and lengthening the tube can give you other advantages that compound one on the other; up to a point, of course. I'm not going to give a design class here because 1) the point here is to show you there is a lot to learn and you can't learn it all at once, and 2) there others here better qualified than I to do that.

depends on what you want to put in the rocket and if you want to do clustering or not.

Depends on the payload, yes. Please, really, please forget about clustering until this project is over. clustering will not help you reach this goal, and trying it will slow you down at best.

How big should my parachute be for a rocket that is a total of 32 inches long? Please give the dimensions in inches.
Total Body tube length: 32 inches / 81.28 cm

Now that's ironic. Up until now, through the quiz questions, you've placed too much emphasis on the mass changes caused by various design changes. But here, you're giving the rocket's dimensions where it is only the mass that matters.

I see now that far too much of what I typed above is water under the bridge. One thing is not, though. Opinions will very, but for my two pence that Frangible Arcas would be a good second step, not first. The first step should be, IMO, and as others have said, should be some A-B-C birds. Then if you wand to skip the Estes (or similar) D-E and go to the Arcas and composite motors, fine. There's something I crossed out above that I'll bring back: starting small also means startin cheap, so screwing up won't hurt so much. Remember, we learn more from our failures than from when things go smoothly (if we're paying attention) so "If at first you do succeed, try, try again". If you never crash a rocket, you're doing it wrong. So go out and crash some cheap ones.

I'll leave it to @smstachwick from here out.

 

[smstachwick]

No need. This is a public conversation, after all.

With @Ayush Chauhan ’s approval I could invite more people to the chat and/or post the OR design file. It’s about as well-tweaked as I think it’s going to get.

 

[jqavins]

What I meant is that I'm sure I will have little or nothing to add that you won't cover as well or better, and more voices saying the same things won't help.

 

[smstachwick]

What I meant is that I'm sure I will have little or nothing to add that you won't cover as well or better, and more voices saying the same things won't help.

Fair enough, makes sense.

 

[Ayush Chauhan]

E motors are generally considered mid-power, although starting with a kit is preferable to going scratch-build right out the gate.

Still, I think you can do better. Something this size:

View attachment 560468

can still hurt you if it drops out of the sky in streamlined condition (which did come very close to happening to me this weekend), but it’s easier to build, finish, prep, and troubleshoot. It’s also cheap and you’ll learn much from it that you can apply to to its bigger sisters.

The Arcas will have many of the same parts, just more robust (read: with more penetration power). You really want something this size dropping through your head?

View attachment 560471

(Images from Apogee Components)

Invest a few pounds and a few hours into flying an Estes Alpha or similar. Three or four flights should do it. You’ll be glad you did.

Can't lie, but it's too late we have already ordered the ARCAS kit. So, I guess I am using that.

Also, how can you even mess up a rocket kit? It makes sense to mess up a rocket made from scratch but not a kit that comes with instructions.

 

[Antares JS]

Also, how can you even mess up a rocket kit? It makes sense to mess up a rocket made from scratch but not a kit that comes with instructions.

Oh, my sweet summer child... What do you know of error? Error is for the little rockets, when the loss only amounts to a few dollars. Error is for the low-powered flight, when the potential for injury and property damage is minimized, and for beginners to learn and grow and become proficient rocketeers.

Human error is ubiquitous, and having a kit with instructions is no guarantee you won't make a mistake and screw it up. By building small kits first, you come to an understanding of the idiosyncrasies of rocketry (behavior of your glue, best way to make a strong glue joint, best way to keep something in place as it dries, how to pack a parachute and install a nose so it comes out reliably, etc.) that are easily applicable to building larger rockets. I highly recommend that you pick up 2-3 easy Estes kits and build and fly those first. Once you get that Arcas, set it aside for later.

 

[jqavins]

Oh, my sweet summer child...

 

[Rex R]

And sometimes it is as easy as following the instructions. Which are written by humans, usually more than one.

 

[dr wogz]

I now insist we add: "Please read, follow, and understand the contents in this manual" as one place i worked at [train wheels for/on service trucks], where we got a service call from an installer. they had an issue with the installation.

Did you install it per the manual?
yes
Did you follow the steps on installation & calibration?
yes
Did you understand why ... ?
No.

While I don't remember exactly what they didn't understand, it just struck me / us odd that they went thru the manual, blindly, and never once stopped to think, to ask, to comprehend what they were supposed to do..

 

[techrat]

Also, how can you even mess up a rocket kit? It makes sense to mess up a rocket made from scratch but not a kit that comes with instructions.

I've heard stories where a new rocketeer glued on the nose cone. Needless to say, the recovery system did not deploy. Ask any RSO for horror stories and you'll get 'em.

 

[Ayush Chauhan]

Human error is ubiquitous, and having a kit with instructions is no guarantee you won't make a mistake and screw it up.

The likely hood of me screwing up after 2-3 months of preparing and reading about model rocketry and gathering information day by day until the kit arrives is very unlikely. I have faith. Allow it man...

 

[jqavins]

While I don't remember exactly what they didn't understand, it just struck me / us odd that they went thru the manual, blindly, and never once stopped to think, to ask, to comprehend what they were supposed to do..

Sadly, that doesn't surprise me at all. They're not paid to think, so they all to many of them don't. Often, they've been beaten over the head for deviating from the instructions, and sometimes for wasting time asking questions, so they just do what they're told. That sort of thing is equally the fault of the worker or engineer, the foreworker if any, and management, but it's all too common.

Another things, Ayush, that you will learn is that threads wander into digressions a lot. But I'll stop this one here.

The likely hood of me screwing up after 2-3 months of preparing and reading about model rocketry and gathering information day by day until the kit arrives is very unlikely. I have faith. Allow it man...

It's no comment on you when I say that I've heard that before - and even said it before - and it's proven to be wrong far more often than not. There's virtually nothing that a person can do perfectly the first time, no matter how much book learning one has beforehand.

 

[techrat]

The likely hood of me screwing up after 2-3 months of preparing and reading about model rocketry and gathering information day by day until the kit arrives is very unlikely. I have faith. Allow it man...

And such hubris will be your downfall. I've been back in the hobby for 10 months, I have built 40 different rockets already, flown most of them (this weekend is a club launch hurrah!), and I can tell you with certainty that I still know nothing.

 

[CalebJ]

The likely hood of me screwing up after 2-3 months of preparing and reading about model rocketry and gathering information day by day until the kit arrives is very unlikely. I have faith. Allow it man...

Why are you asking for advice?

There are numerous people reading this thread.

Each has years of making mistakes behind them. Each of us will continue to make new mistakes, and occasionally repeat old ones.

We're suggesting, essentially unanimously, that you start at the beginning.

But you're ignoring that advice. Every step of the way.

So what's the point?

 

[Antares JS]

The likely hood of me screwing up after 2-3 months of preparing and reading about model rocketry and gathering information day by day until the kit arrives is very unlikely. I have faith. Allow it man...

You asked how could someone screw up a kit with instructions, I warned you it happens. Now, I'm also going to warn you that theory and practice are two very different things. Beware of hubris.

 

[jqavins]

"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is."

-- Origin uncertain.​

 

[samb]

Small point for the TRFers. Not this rocket:



This rocket:


https://wizardrockets.co.uk/?product=frangible-arcas-rocket-kit

The OP is going to his first launch in February and I hope he makes some friends with the locals. Nothing beats the smell of burnt black powder in the morning. And hands-on experience.

 

[RokitFlyr]

Well, that makes a BIG difference. Just a 24mm rocket kit. Might be some Crow samiches to follow?

 

[smstachwick]

Small point for the TRFers. Not this rocket:

View attachment 560580

This rocket:
View attachment 560583View attachment 560584

https://wizardrockets.co.uk/?product=frangible-arcas-rocket-kit

The OP is going to his first launch in February and I hope he makes some friends with the locals. Nothing beats the smell of burnt black powder in the morning. And hands-on experience.

I see. I didn’t realize there were more scales of these, thanks.

 

[PayLoad]

Building a HPR prior to spending a few bucks on estes rockets & flying cheap, learning from experience, is madness. You will learn more making an estes kit than we can tell you here - "doing" is much better than "reading about".

Why the reluctance to do it right & start small? In the long run, it will SAVE you time & money. I lMAO when above mentioned "but the big kits have instructions, so I'm fine" post. The big kits don't come with instructions, they come with suggestions & an assumption that you already know what you are doing.

 

[smstachwick]

The likely hood of me screwing up after 2-3 months of preparing and reading about model rocketry and gathering information day by day until the kit arrives is very unlikely. I have faith. Allow it man...

It’s greater than you think. Nothing in rocketry is error-proof. Judging if things are strong enough, too tight or too loose, is difficult to convey on an instruction sheet. It’s also possible to get parts confused for one another and put in the wrong place, to inadvertently skip steps in the instructions, etc. This is far more likely for somebody who has never seen the components before, as well as for somebody who has not had an opportunity to develop the specific hand skills required for correct, neat assembly. Trust me, I have recent experience with this, I made precisely these mistakes attempting to assemble my first reload about a year ago, and I made them with several of my early rockets too.

It can also take a while to figure out a good workstation too, you would not believe how many of my rockets have been undermined in build quality or even just the experience of the build by feeling scrunched in my space or not having it organized well. Even transport arrangements can be subject to mistakes: I lost a good chunk of my equipment out of my truck’s tailgate on the way to the range two weeks ago, and it’s entirely possible to have rockets damaged by equipment shifting around normally on the road.

Lastly, some conditions can appear benign but actually affect safety significantly. Remember when I mentioned almost getting hurt last weekend? Part of that was because the wind was blowing from the south (unusual at my site) and making rockets weathercock towards the flight line. At a big club launch with a bunch of first-timers, a few rockets going lawn dart in that direction was inevitable, but I didn’t put 2 and 2 together and I came very close to paying the price for it. I’m very glad that that family was flying a little Alpha III instead of a Super-Mega-DeathRocket 3000 or something.

Going to the range is inevitably a humbling experience, it will take the hubris and ignorance of any visitor and shove it where the sun don’t shine. But that’s why we do this, if we’re paying attention we become wiser.

Just remember that you’re literally playing with fire and with objects that, if all goes well, will fly through the air at high speed. It doesn’t hurt to assume that there will be mistakes and then act accordingly. Why not make them on a rocket where they’ll be small?

 

[Banzai88]

A smart man learns from his mistakes, a wise man learns from the mistakes of others, and an arrogant man fails to believe that he CAN make mistakes.

Even our most seasoned veterans make mistakes. YouTube is chock full of rocket crash/CATO videos proving it!

 

[dr wogz]

and fins glued on upside down..
(or with 'hot glue'..)

 

[BigMacDaddy]

One thing that is surprising to me is that you can become a "Well Known Member" in two weeks just by replying a bunch of times to one thread that you started.

 

[Ayush Chauhan]

Why are you asking for advice?

There are numerous people reading this thread.

Each has years of making mistakes behind them. Each of us will continue to make new mistakes, and occasionally repeat old ones.

We're suggesting, essentially unanimously, that you start at the beginning.

But you're ignoring that advice. Every step of the way.

So what's the point?

sorry, fine I will go get a smaller rocket to begin with

 

[smstachwick]

sorry, fine I will go get a smaller rocket to begin with

Smart move.

I hope you realize I and the rest of us aren’t being hard on you for no reason. The stuff we’re saying, the range has said to us. Sometimes it has cost us our rockets, we wouldn’t want you in the same position if it’s avoidable, especially not for a school project.

I’ve been in that spot where hard-to-hear feedback has forced me to see things differently, realize that I might be overextending myself, and take baby steps. I’m so glad that it did, otherwise I’d probably be out of an expensive rocket kit. Here’s my receipt.

Thread 'All-in-One 38mm (First HPR rocket)'
https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/all-in-one-38mm-first-hpr-rocket.170035/

I look back at that now and I realize that not only did I not have all the answers I needed, I wasn’t even asking the right questions a lot of the time.

 

[Voyager1]

The likely hood of me screwing up after 2-3 months of preparing and reading about model rocketry and gathering information day by day until the kit arrives is very unlikely. I have faith. Allow it man...

Now, that's confidence! I wish I could be so. I've been building small, medium and large rockets from kits and scratch for 15 years. I can still manage to stuff up.

 

[jqavins]

It can also take a while to figure out a good workstation too, you would not believe how many of my rockets have been undermined in build quality or even just the experience of the build by feeling scrunched in my space or not having it organized well. Even transport arrangements can be subject to mistakes: I lost a good chunk of my equipment out of my truck’s tailgate on the way to the range two weeks ago, and it’s entirely possible to have rockets damaged by equipment shifting around normally on the road.

Ohhh, yeah. Been there, done that, still doing that.

Just remember that you’re literally playing with fire and with objects that, if all goes well, will fly through the air at high speed. It doesn’t hurt to assume that there will be mistakes and then act accordingly.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the true meaning of Murphy's Law, not the joke it has become.

and fins glued on upside down..
(or with 'hot glue'..)

Gluing on one of four fins upside down so it's swept forward makes for a cool look, and rarely affects stability noticeably. Yeah, that's it, it's for the look, I meant to do that.

One thing that is surprising to me is that you can become a "Well Known Member" in two weeks just by replying a bunch of times to one thread that you started.

That's the forum software. It's the default statement under one's user name that Angie set (one can change it for one's self) and if there's a feature to change it automatically based on post count or something it is not set up.

 

[dr wogz]

Gluing on one of four fins upside down so it's swept forward makes for a cool look, and rarely affects stability noticeably. Yeah, that's it, it's for the look, I meant to do that.

meant more as gluing a [balsa] fin with the grain parallel to the body tube, not the leading edge of the fin..