We were there Saturday for NERRF-4 and it was a great time. I was impressed by how well most things ran and having been to the previous 3 incarnations I could really see how fine tuned this thing is becoming.
Having said that I must second the comment about the low power operations. We got in a grand total of 2 launches the whole day. Would have been 3 but continuity problems with one of the pads prevented that, and after 2 tries just didn't have enough time to wait for a spot for attempt #3. Now don't get me wrong, I'm thrilled that the thing is so popular that there's this much of a crowd and we really come to see the big stuff fly, but there has to be a way the guys in charge can figure this out and ease the frustration. Hopefully this is something that will be looked at for NERRF-5. That's about the only thing I can think of that needs improvement.
Glenn
I couldn't make it this year but I was there last year and my daughter and I got a total of ten flights over two days. All of them 'E' or lower power.You've been heard. Now let me see if I got it right:
1. Goal is to have continuous launching (or as close as possible) on Low Power flights
2. Fliers should leave the LCO alone to launch rockets. Talk to the Range Boss. That's his/her job.
3. Rods and Rails should never be aimed at the crowd (although that is specified in a number of NERRF documents, it can't be said enough!).
Maybe the pad managers can make it part of their final check of the range before proceeding to give the LCO the "OK to launch"...
Several racks can be prepared and launched in the time it takes to get the High Power pads ready.
Once the High Power pads are ready, the Low Power launches are suspended while the High Power rockets are launched. Once all the High Power rockets have been launched, the Low Power launches can resume.
This also has the benefit of the High Power fliers not having to wait until they go through the Low Power racks.
As Bobby mentioned working with the FAA is time consuming but a pleasure. For future reference I only call the FAA when the expected altitude exceeds 5,500'. There are actually three calls on busy FAA days, NY Center, NY TRACON and Boston TMU. The FAA accommodates our courtesy calls and requests whenever they can, 95%+ of the time. Only under severe conditions like we had on Friday, do they disallow launching. In fact on Friday the conditions were so poor in the late afternoon they requested that we terminate all activity. The thunderstorms pushed the incoming aircraft to unpredictable patterns and altitudes. On Saturday and Sunday they were overwhelmed with the number of requests, so I recommended, and the FAA accepted, that we would cluster the requests..... that led to some of the confusion at the LCO table, because the windows were basically "Now" for multiple rockets. But it did allow for those high altitude launches.
After all was said and done.... flights were many, safe and fun.
Nothings perfect, but NERRF 4 came close.
Just noticed that Brian has started uploading photos from NERRF at Print Your Hobby.
https://www.printyourhobby.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=831
Gary, what happened? Why didn't you fly in the Gizmo drag-race?
For NERRF-5, I suggest all 5.5K and above flights, regardless of impulse, be flown from the away cell and that away cell flights are scheduled for the top of each hour. The FAA call would be placed at 5 minutes to the hour and launch would be as soon as FAA grants permission. If the FAA says wait 15 minutes, the rack would be flown at 10 after.
The METRA away cell controller supports four independent circuits. This would allow up to 32 such flights per day and seems sufficient capacity to have met NERRF-4 demand. If necessary the schedule could be adjusted to flying every 45 minutes or so.
The primary motivation is to isolate the 5.5K flights from interfering with the rhythm of the near fields split range operation. It also eases the burden on the FAA liaison and away cell managers.
...Fred
Building the feedback checklist for NERRF-5 --> Here's some repeats and some new ideas...
7. Heavy pre-launch check (a couple of weeks in advance) of all electronics, clips, wires for HP AND LP, to ensure that everything is working at its best. Maybe, we can also clean and replace clips and wires as needed every morning or at end of each day.
A good list to improve an aready great event.
While the items listed are excellent, I do not believe that #7 fully addresses the fundamental root causes of the accidental firing of four high impulse rockets.
The orange pads had been working properly until the Gizmo drag race appears to have fused the relay closed. Pre-NERRF system checks would not have changed this.
The solution to that occurence has to include a careful analysis of potential failure modes of launch system electronics, and to use systems that:
> Use solid state relays and / or have relay failure alarms
> can
For NERRF-5, I suggest all 5.5K and above flights, regardless of impulse, be flown from the away cell and that away cell flights are scheduled for the top of each hour.
A neat idea however I would like to add a slight variation. Have a bank of pads reserved for the high altitude sub-m flights. Perhaps in combination with a dedicated hybrid cell (which seemed to work very well). I suggest this as it would allow for standard rails and, horrors, a rod or two. Those pad configurations are not common at the away cell.
I do have a question for those that espouse a separate, continuously available, low power facility. One concern that has been raised was that people loading LPR might not be paying attention to the flights on HPR and vice versa. The CMASS model is good, however I am not convinced it is the way to ensure safety in this situation.
I do have a question for those that espouse a separate, continuously available, low power facility. One concern that has been raised was that people loading LPR might not be paying attention to the flights on HPR and vice versa. The CMASS model is good, however I am not convinced it is the way to ensure safety in this situation.
Enter your email address to join: