This reminds me of a discussion in the early days of altimeter use in in NAR competition, with porly worded rules. I suggested that the altimeter could be ported to a low pressure region of the airframe, producing higher altitude readings than those taken at true apogee. I suggest the altimeter could be ported to the convex corner of a conical transition. To drive home the point, I suggested that altimeter could just be ported to the throat of a venturi. They finally adjusted the rules.
So, my question is, how would you design a venturi into or around a contest rocket to maximize the "altitude" reading of the altimeter?
Would that scam work, given that altitude at apogee is near zero? (Actually zero in a dead vertical flight.) The effect should be, if I'm not mistaken, a false appearance of very rapid acceleration as both the outside pressure and the effect of the venturi are increasing, then a slow rise as the real air pressure continues to fall while the venturi effect of fake altitude fades, leading to an accurate apogee.
OK, yes, the fake altitude peaks 1.375% higher than the actual altitude in this very, very crude simulation.
Previously I'd release a "Fat Ramjet" model based on ellipticaloptician's designs but that rocket crashed. In inspecting the wreckage I determined I could do better, so here is the redesign of the parts. There are two versions of the base and the mid parts, one sized for Estes Maxi Rods (3/16"...