GrossApproximator
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2010
- Messages
- 408
- Reaction score
- 0
I don't a few of the motor manufacturers, but I'm no expert. What is the smallest sparky motor (or whatever the other brands call it)?
The Pro29-2G G80 is smaller than the G75M. The G80 total impulse is 93Ns v.s. 120Ns for the G75M.The smallest sparky is probably the new 29mm single-use Aerotech Metalstorm G75M
I have some 60NS F30FS Jerry's specials motors, but they aren't NAR Cert. so they might not count. He also made some G45FS-8 motors which worked very well. Ahh... Politics....
I have some 60NS F30FS Jerry's specials motors, but they aren't NAR Cert. so they might not count. He also made some G45FS-8 motors which worked very well. Ahh... Politics....
I'm not so sure that NAR played any role in that revision (which, AFAIK, hasn't been officially adopted yet). The committee that developed the proposed revisions was comprised of industry reps. (including AT and CTI) and other people involved in rocketry. If NAR was indeed represented on the committee, then so was TRA. To imply that the recommendation to classify all sparky motors as HP was the result of some backroom collaboration between just NAR and the NFPA seriously distorts the facts, I think.They also require Level 1 or higher certification......
You can thank the NAR & the NFPA for that one....:gavel:
JD
I'm not so sure that NAR played any role in that revision (which, AFAIK, hasn't been officially adopted yet). The committee that developed the proposed revisions was comprised of industry reps. (including AT and CTI) and other people involved in rocketry. If NAR was indeed represented on the committee, then so was TRA. To imply that the recommendation to classify all sparky motors as HP was the result of some backroom collaboration between just NAR and the NFPA seriously distorts the facts, I think.
Mark K.
Yes, that's what I thought, but I didn't want to say it definitely because I wasn't sure. So it wasn't just NAR representing the consumers; TRA was there, too.the committee has both industry and consumer org reps, so yes, the manufacturers as well as both NAR and TRA are represented.
I just knew that there had to be an upside.The choices were no F or G class sparky motors at all or classifying them as high power so as to restrict their use to qualified (hopefully!) individuals. As a side effect, since these are now high power motors, it would make sense to allow their use for L1 certification purposes. This would also have the effect of increasing the number of certified fliers.
The choices were no F or G class sparky motors at all or classifying them as high power so as to restrict their use to qualified (hopefully!) individuals. As a side effect, since these are now high power motors, it would make sense to allow their use for L1 certification purposes. This would also have the effect of increasing the number of certified fliers.
Nope. There have been L1 motors in the <H class for some time (E.G. G104, G33, G75, etc), and you can't use them for certification flights. You need a cert to use them, but you must use at least an H motor for the certification itself.
It is considered a HP motor currently because its over 62.5 grams of propellant. However, it should become a modroc motor when the weight limit goes up in 2011
A few of the limitations were changed. Nothing that really affects the average hobbyist except that the ModRoc motor propellant weight limit was raised to 125g and all motors that produce sparks for visual effect will require high power certification to fly no matter the impulse class. This change will NOT take effect until it is voted on by the NFPA. From what I understand, it is likely to pass, and will take effect some time in 2011.
so you want to see a kid buy a E sparky motor, take it to a park on a dry windy day, start a huge fire which spreads into a nearby housing developing, resulting in the government imposing more or total regulation of the hobby. The government is allowing nar/tra to self regulate the hobby to a degree, having to be hpr certified is the best way to limit the use of these motors to ppl who should know what they are doing. Its better than NAR and TRA not certifying any Sparky motor.ghrocketman said:I would just as soon see ZERO regulation of sparky motors over and above the class they are in, but then again I am for total deregulation of ALL rocketry activities as a whole also other than in relation to FAA ALTITUDE LIMITS ONLY without a waiver.
I see most regulations in this hobby as LITTLE MORE than NUISANCE red-tape impediments to a hobby with a STELLAR safety record
I would just as soon see ZERO regulation of sparky motors over and above the class they are in, but then again I am for total deregulation of ALL rocketry activities as a whole also other than in relation to FAA ALTITUDE LIMITS ONLY without a waiver.
I see most regulations in this hobby as LITTLE MORE than NUISANCE red-tape impediments to a hobby with a STELLAR safety record.
This is not the first time a motor smaller than an H required a user to be level 1!
Examples: AT F101, G125
well those may be a bad example because they are simply motors with an average thrust of more than 80N.
So? That's one of the criteria.
I just think it's a bad example
I just think it's a bad example
To think of it I think those are the only examples, Man aerotech just skimmed under that radar with their G80T 62.5 grams of propellent and a 77.6N average thrust give or take 2.1N....
A bad example of WHAT?
The example is of something that is less than H total impulse, yet exceeds some definition of what is a legal Model Rocket Motor.
Any of the many defining limits can be exceeded. Only one needs to be exceeded to no longer be a Model Rocket Motor and now be a High Power Rocket Motor.
It can be total impulse.
It can be average thrust.
It can be burning particle size.
It can be propellant weight.
Enter your email address to join: