Ogive not that good.

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
this kinda reminds me of the fat guy who buys the carbon fiber & titanium bike..

"Cuse it's carbon fiber & titanium, it's super light, so it'll go fast & far!!" (Regardless of the extra 50+lbs the cyclist is permanently carrying around with him...)
Kinda like drinking a Diet Coke to wash down your deep fried Twinkie.
 

These are almost all convexe ... 🤔

I think someone should build an inward / concave / positive parabola nose cone, with a tunnel-duct throughout, and at least two motors on the bottom circumference. Like 20-donut-thick donut.

And on this 25th day of July, in the year Two Thousand and Twenty, such was my modest contribution to model rocketry.🧐 😁😋
 
Last edited:
These are almost all convexe ... 🤔

I think someone should build an inward / concave / positive parabola nose cone, with a tunnel-duct throughout, and at least two motors on the bottom circumference. Like 20-donut-thick donut.

And on this 25th day of July, in the year Two Thousand and Twenty, such was my modest contribution to model rocketry.
I had a rocket that I built to illustrate creative scratch building. I used it when I gave talks at conventions and such. The nose cone was turned out of one piece of balsa, and had a concave curvature,and ended with a about a 1 inch sphere at the top. I wanted something that could not have been kitbashed from other parts. It also 3D sculpted fins, and some detail parts from old plastic model kits. It was BT-60 based and powered by an F7. It was never painted or flown, but drag can be good thing.
 
I think, as well, that NC designs are designed for their intended purpose & costs associated with their fabrication & materials..

Look at sounding rockets
Look at missiles (Yes, air to air, air to ground, ground to air)
Look at manned missions to space..

look at cars even..

this is an engineering problem, and with these types of problems comes the need to compromise..
 
I know for a lot of folks performance isn’t a thing. I’m a long way from setting records but I routinely fly past Mach 2. At those speeds, little things do matter. My personal best on an L motor is 24,385’ at BALLS. Top speed of Mach 2.4. I’ve flown 38mm rockets to 16,000’, also past Mach 2. It’s a different kind of challenge than a scale model or getting a great paint job. But it’s one I’ve enjoyed. Especially with 38mm high flyers, everything is a challenge, just not a lot of room for tracking or recovery.

I agree for most flights the little stuff does not matter. But start pushing things and they all add up.

Tony
 
I had a rocket that I built to illustrate creative scratch building. I used it when I gave talks at conventions and such. The nose cone was turned out of one piece of balsa, and had a concave curvature,and ended with a about a 1 inch sphere at the top. I wanted something that could not have been kitbashed from other parts. It also 3D sculpted fins, and some detail parts from old plastic model kits. It was BT-60 based and powered by an F7. It was never painted or flown, but drag can be good thing.

Got any photo's?
 
Kinda like drinking a Diet Coke to wash down your deep fried Twinkie.
We're just looking for balance here. Calories not gained from diet coke justifies the huge pile of calories consumed in that toxic twinkie; or does it?

BTW I am the fat guy with a carbon bike. Why? Lighter to toss in the back of the truck for an remote bike start? I can't explain it, but after a long ride, I feel less tired after a ride on a lighter bike as compared to a heavier one. You tell me. I would probably be even fatter if I didn't ride that bike, regardless of what it weighs. It's been decades since I ate a twinkie. Definitely low on the list of things to shove down my throat.

The break is over. Back to the very serious NC discussion....
 
Back
Top