Passing the Kármán Line

rocket sok
SilicdyneTRF
the rocketry show
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Did Up Aerospace go out of business? I know that they haven't had a launch this year, but assumed that they were busy building that cubesat deployment rocket. Perhaps that wasn't the best business case to sight in retrospect.
 
It is interesting to hear what others think on this subject. Going back to the original question posed by JCRL about an amateur rocket to space (pass Karman Line at 100 km), I guess the answer is one. And, it was some time ago. It is technically difficult and could cost a lot. This is no surprise. And, of course, you need a suitable location for the launch. But, I don't think that's why it hasn't occurred more often. I think it's unfortunate because the present path to space for amateurs would be clearer. We would be able to see how others have done it, and I bet the cost would be much less than estimated based on this project 15 years ago. And, we can't really base cost very accurately on university team projects, because they are university projects frankly.
But, I think after the next one, it will occur a lot more often and there will be progress. We'll see.
 
FYI here's the Traveler IV Apogee Analysis document from May 2019.

TLDR; "After an internal review of the raw data, analytic methods and Monte Carlo flight simulations were used to determine and validate an apogee of 339 800 ft ±16,500 ft, passing the Karman line with a confidence of 90%."
 

Attachments

  • Traveler IV Apogee Analysis.pdf
    1.8 MB · Views: 15
plugger said:
He pulled that bit from, well, you know.
USC RPL is a great example of iterative success, failures along the way, and perseverance. But of course they're university students so someone will always want to go out of the way to p*ss on their parade because, well, idk?
Click to expand...

I guess I am behind by a whole news cycle and then some. I had no idea they had launched since then and were successful. And I now sound a buffoon.

I'll quietly see myself out.

"It takes two years to learn to speak and 60 to learn to keep quiet."
Ernest Hemingway
 
watheyak said:
I guess I am behind by a whole news cycle and then some. I had no idea they had launched since then and were successful. And I now sound a buffoon.

I'll quietly see myself out.

"It takes two years to learn to speak and 60 to learn to keep quiet."
Ernest Hemingway
Click to expand...

Oh, you missed the success. That's the best part! That's like missing the last scene of Rudy.

Here, check this out. USC's Rocket Propulsion Lab has a pretty decent website: https://www.uscrpl.com/

Here's the link to Traveler IV, the rocket that high-fived space: https://www.uscrpl.com/updates/2019/5/22/traveler-iv

There's also info on their Traveler III, the one that launched in 2018 without the electronics armed, which they do consider a failure and learning experience. Their write-up of the launch is worth the time if you have it: https://www.uscrpl.com/updates/2018/11/24/traveler-iii
 
Cnorm said:
Oh, you missed the success. That's the best part! That's like missing the last scene of Rudy.

Here, check this out. USC's Rocket Propulsion Lab has a pretty decent website: https://www.uscrpl.com/
Click to expand...

And somewhere there is a well done documentary video, showing the heartache, struggles, blood, sweat, and tears that went into years of effort. It might be this one, I'm not sure.

 
When discussing how many amateur rockets have made it to space, where do you draw the line between amateur and professional? Is it based on how you funded the rocket or how you built the rocket? As I type this, it occurs me to that an amateur rocket would need to comply with all NAR regulations, while a professional rocket wouldn't; is that the delineation? I'm just curious about how we talk about these things. If I was able to print a LOX+CH4 engine (like Relativity Space) is it no longer an "amateur" or "sport" rocket?
 
JCRL said:
When discussing how many amateur rockets have made it to space, where do you draw the line between amateur and professional? Is it based on how you funded the rocket or how you built the rocket? As I type this, it occurs me to that an amateur rocket would need to comply with all NAR regulations, while a professional rocket wouldn't; is that the delineation? I'm just curious about how we talk about these things. If I was able to print a LOX+CH4 engine (like Relativity Space) is it no longer an "amateur" or "sport" rocket?
Click to expand...

Amateur space shots are outside of NAR's scope.

I'd say anyone doing it for fun is an amateur. If its for profit, professional.
 
JCRL said:
When discussing how many amateur rockets have made it to space, where do you draw the line between amateur and professional? Is it based on how you funded the rocket or how you built the rocket? As I type this, it occurs me to that an amateur rocket would need to comply with all NAR regulations, while a professional rocket wouldn't; is that the delineation? I'm just curious about how we talk about these things. If I was able to print a LOX+CH4 engine (like Relativity Space) is it no longer an "amateur" or "sport" rocket?
Click to expand...

There’s no such thing as NAR regulations (or Tripoli regulations). Each organization has Safety Codes that govern its members’ activities but have no regulatory power on anyone else.
The Tripoli Research Safety Code allows quite a bit of latitude for someone who wishes to reach space using motors of their own design.
 
DavidMcCann said:
I'd say anyone doing it for fun is an amateur. If its for profit, professional.
Click to expand...
And if it's for college credit?
Steve Shannon said:
There’s no such thing as NAR regulations (or Tripoli regulations). Each organization has Safety Codes that govern its members’ activities but have no regulatory power on anyone else.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, Steve (and that's saying a lot) I must call you out. The safety codes govern 1) activity at sanctioned launches and 2) activities one wishes to be covered by group liability insurance. Otherwise they are not binding on members any more than on anyone else.
 
Pretty good definition. We know these kinds of distinctions have plagued sports in the past. Keep in mind that the 2004 space shot is often referred to as the first civilian space launch. So, amateur or civilian; what's the difference? How about amateur, student, civilian, and professional? (don't really want an answer I guess).
Amateurs become professionals all the time. Can they go back? Anyway, look at the relationship of the Civilian Space Exploration Team (CSXT) and Up Aerospace. Also, maybe Rocketman Enterprises, Jerry Larson and who started Up Aerospace and it's officers. Is Jerry a professional rocket man too? So, was the 2014 launch the 2nd successful amateur launch to space and the altitude record holder? Who's motor did they use? Who built it?
We all use commercial components to varying extent. For example, I don't make most of my electronics, I buy them. Some people purchase a lot of components, including motors and complete fin cans. If I bought everything, had someone put it together for me, and launched it to space, would I be the 3rd amateur space flight? Good example of why I don't like the 1st, 2nd, whatever thing. I prefer to focus on accomplishments and advancements.
Can an amateur build a hybrid, mono-propellant, or bi-propellant rocket and launch it to space? You bet they could! It's probably going to happen. 1st Amateur bi-propellant rocket to space. But, what if the first stage is bi-propellant and sustainer is solid. Oh boy...
 
Let's not get all baseball here. I bet someone knows who holds the record for the most strikeouts by a right handed American League pitcher in a Wednesday night game, but who cares?

Accomplishments matter. Being the first to accomplish it does bring something more, and we can each judge for ourselves if that something that matters to us. But being the first to do it with a two stage rocket using solid propellant in the first stage and an HTP-based hybrid in the second? "Oh, sure, someone else used a hybrid second stage first, but they were using NOX!" Who cares?
 
I think it's less of "who cares" and more of "does it matter?" and of course it does! Like Richard mentioned, it matters in terms of demonstrating the path to space. The more people who do it, the more examples of how to do it are created, and the number of people who believe it's realistic grows. I think that we've imagined quiet a few possible pathways to space already in this thread, which was my intention for starting this conversation: how many people have done it, and how did they do it?
 
jqavins said:
And if it's for college credit?
With all due respect, Steve (and that's saying a lot) I must call you out. The safety codes govern 1) activity at sanctioned launches and 2) activities one wishes to be covered by group liability insurance. Otherwise they are not binding on members any more than on anyone else.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. We do not control what a member does when they are not using our insurance. But we do care about the image that our members present.
It’s important also to know that we get a great deal of joy from those who safely and responsibly participate in activities that go beyond the scope of Tripoli Rocketry Association. We don’t want to restrain the next Robert Goddard; we want to provide a safe place for her or him to learn as much as they can about rocket safety before they start innovation that extends beyond our Safety Codes.
 
This forum is interesting. There's silly stuff frankly, and some really interesting kinds of rocketry info. People conduct research and develop new stuff all the time that advances amateur rocketry. I'll never launch a rocket to space probably and will not be on a team that does that. I can be a little annoying at times so don't get involved with many group projects. But, it doesn't mean those of us not actively pursuing a space shot can't contribute. For example, I'm currently working on roll control and recovery from high alt (i.e. bringing a rocket down quickly and safely to stay in the cylinder). Other people are working on improving GPS for high velocity high alt flights. And, there's work on active stabilization. Always helps to be pointed up for that space flight! Kind of wish there was a separate forum or way to discuss the amateur space shot subject. Maybe this could be a subject of a post, but things tend to go OT at times, and branches can be distracting when the medium is linear. Someone almost has to keep the subject coming back. Even in this forum, I saw a post on guns. Has someone confused NAR with the NRA? Do you know what I mean? Anyway, I'll be looking for subjects related to the "amateur space program" and thank you for initiating this post and your comments on this subject.
 
Richard Dierking said:
But, it doesn't mean those of us not actively pursuing a space shot can't contribute. For example, I'm currently working on roll control and recovery from high alt (i.e. bringing a rocket down quickly and safely to stay in the cylinder). Other people are working on improving GPS for high velocity high alt flights. And, there's work on active stabilization.
Click to expand...

I'd be more than happy to test your experimental roll control and recovery hardware if I ever take a space shot. You make a great point about how everyone can contribute in their own way.
 
Richard Dierking said:
But, it doesn't mean those of us not actively pursuing a space shot can't contribute. For example, I'm currently working on roll control and recovery from high alt (i.e. bringing a rocket down quickly and safely to stay in the cylinder). Other people are working on improving GPS for high velocity high alt flights. And, there's work on active stabilization. Always helps to be pointed up for that space flight! Kind of wish there was a separate forum or way to discuss the amateur space shot subject. Maybe this could be a subject of a post, but things tend to go OT at times, and branches can be distracting when the medium is linear. Someone almost has to keep the subject coming back.
Click to expand...
JCRL said:
You make a great point about how everyone can contribute in their own way.
Click to expand...
If there's enough interest, this might be an appropriate subject for a new sub-forum. There wouldn't be any "official" TRF Space Shot Project, but a place to concentrate threads discussing various aspects, sharing knowledge, experience (if any) and even design details. It'd certainly be interesting. Something in it might wind up being put to use.
 
Good, you see what I mean. I know there are lots of people that would be interested in this. On the other hand, I don't wish to dilute the forum further than it already is either.
I look at the forum email each morning, and honestly get about half way through the list before deleting the email. There's the pic of the day, and joke of the day, and the what did you do today not rocketry related (really). Anyway, I just don't have the bandwidth to go through all the stuff to see what's really interesting or useful to me. I bet there are other people too.
 
You do know you can choose which threads you want to watch for new posts? If you're getting too many new post messages then just unwatch some.
 
I think that starting a space sub-forum would be really inspiring and educational for the members here :)
 
Thank you Joe. Yes, I should probably do that.
There are some past threads that kind of went in and out of my interest, like the university space shot posting. I guess thread is a good description of these things.
Anyway, a general space shot (or maybe just high-alt) tech forum with many possible branches would be interesting. It sure would be easier to find info and follow.
Of course there's also the problem of seeing some interesting new post, but you find out the original post is like 21 pages back. OMG, how could you ever go through all that material to come up to speed? You almost need someone coming in occasionally to sum up what's been said.
That's it, I need the executive summary version of the forum! Sorry, just kidding of course.
 
I hope JCRL doesn't think I'm hijacking this thread btw. I'm actually trying to stay on point. This relates to why I don't think you see more about things like Amateur Rocket to Space on the forum. Occasionally, I consider posting my stuff, like the small side bays I'm using to deploy drogues or mechanical hatches for descent from apogee. But, I'm reluctant to do it because I'll be posting with the let's see a photo of your pet today. And, people will jump on that don't really have an interest in high alt/space flight stuff. I don't want to insult anyone, I'm just being candid. So, if you are looking for specific info on developments in amateur space projects, I'm not sure this is the best place. Perhaps it doesn't exist presently.
 

Similar threads

stjepanbm
Hi!
Replies
7
Views
415
teepot
teepot
mjennings
Gemini pronunciation question
2 3
Replies
63
Views
1K
John Kemker
John Kemker
RVN7
Cheers from Toronto!
Replies
2
Views
374
Hobie1dog
Hobie1dog
Gunstar
Questions about DIY Centering Rings (BT-60 to 4 inch)
Replies
14
Views
298
Nate G
N
markschnell
Visited the Armstrong Air and Space Museum - Features Estes Saturn V - Great Little Museum
Replies
2
Views
256
markschnell
markschnell

Latest posts

Back
Top