As it has now turned out, by witnesses posting days later (presuming they are correct), the rocket was a PVC pipe rocket of about 4 inch diameter and 4 feet long, powered by a cluster of three E engines. It was apparently angled (EDIT - it seems that it may not have been after all, but the scout rockets were described as being launched at an angle), to purposely crash off in some "safe" downrange area. Flown from an "experimental pad" for rockets of that nature.
Yes, the builder/flier had no recovery device in it at all, it was supposed to crash nose-first with no recovery system, not even pop off the nose.
For some reason (I have a theory but there's been too much wrong speculation about this tragedy already), despite the angle (UPDATE - it now seems not to have been angled), it ended up above the launch area at burnout, then nosed over and fell vertically, near where it was launched, instead of crashing "safely downrange" as intended.
So, bottom line, if the descriptions by those who were there are accurate, it was an unsafe illegal rocket to begin with (sort of like things Jerry Irvine used to publicize and encourage, like horizontally fired handheld model rocket bazookas, and gasoline in model rockets, documented in his magazine CRM long ago). It broke several safety code rules , as well as apparently being in violation of California's current laws for a rocket like that. Which opens the doors for all sorts of legal repercussions for the person who flew it.
I would not go about on a rant-rave bashing the RSO, or whoever was the one most in charge if there was no formal RSO ("official" RSO's are more an NAR/TRA thing and not necessarily used by other launches). Because of the odds that, unfortunately, the person most in authority for allowing that particular flight,
MAY very well have been the victim. :sad:
- George Gassaway
From comments at this news story link:
https://www.pe.com/articles/bentley-786423-rocket-event.html?page=2
******* ****** is correct about the size below, the nose cone had a an approximate 1" gash/hole/tear in it from when it had crashed the year before. the cone had fiber glass/ plastic matt protruding from this hole. The owner had stated as he walked by me that the rocket would not have a parachute, and that it had three size "E" engines, and he was expecting it to "not survive" the flight. I have my own personal comments i could make but i believe they would not serve a purpose of making this any better sooo...
Let me be Clear This was an adults Rocket, not a Scouts. It was Launched at an experimental pad for rockets of this nature. As for its place to being used at an event like this i would leave it up to the NAR and the BSA to decide how to proceed at future events. I believe this incident will help with the safety of future events as long as the reality is shown that this was NOT a typical rocket seen at these events and that the Scouts Rockets are much smaller and typically only use up to a single stage "C" rated engine. I will say that a "Rocket inspection Check" at future events for safety should be conducted for larger unconventional rockets that then could be launched further away from spectators.