Quantcast

Speaking of Articles....

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

Ryan S.

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2003
Messages
3,553
Reaction score
0
I meant to make this post before. Look in the Air and Space magazine from the Smithsonian. there is a long articloe in it about rocketry. Pretty cool!

by the way it is the january 2004 copy and te article is on page 28. It mostly focuses on the most recent LDRS
 

JeffS

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2003
Messages
141
Reaction score
0
I'm going to pick one up this afternoon. Here's a quote from the magazines website:

"And their toy rocket isn't one of those lightweight jobs you can set off in your back yard. It's a fearsome eight-foot-tall projectile powered by a solid-propellant motor similar to those in the space shuttle's 126-foot strap-on boosters, and it appears to be fully capable of taking on cargo-or taking out an F-16, for that matter."

I hope that the magazine's readership is a little more informed than the general public.
 

jetra2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2009
Messages
2,795
Reaction score
2
Oh no! That's not good! Let us hope that the reader base is educated! Please...that's a respected magazine too...

Jason
 

Chilly

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
1,169
Reaction score
1
Haven't seen the article yet but it sounds like we need to flood them with letters to the editor. I'll probably write one myself after reading the mag, and will be sure to post it here for all to see. Some points immediately come to mind:

1) Giant "model" rockets may be loud and look impressive, but they are still just cardboard, wood, and fiberglass. Try to make one robust enough to carry a guidance package, control surfaces, and a meaningful warhead (bowling balls don't count), and you'll be lucky to move the thing a few hundred feet. The old saying is that rockets are easy, but guidance and warheads are HARD.

2) Some of you true rocket scientists can answer this one: yes, our propellant of choice is identical to the stuff used in the shuttle SRBs and some military missiles - but just as an oxidizer. Aren't there some high-energy additives they use as well? Otherwise I don't see how one could fashion a homemade Stinger out of a J350.

3) In light of our current legal struggle, reckless comments like this in a respected national magazine are NOT helpful. I hope the bulk of the story is positive. Air & Space's readership could be full of potential new rocketeers.
 

JeffS

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2003
Messages
141
Reaction score
0
OK, I got the magazine this afternoon and read the article. Except for that one comment quoted above, it was pretty good. It's a shame that's the one they picked out for their web site teaser. If people read the whole thing I think they'll come away with a pretty good picture of HPR. The article focuses on LDRS but mentions model rockets and has some pretty good pictures too. It also mentions how the ATF wants to clamp down on AP.

I'm going to write the editor and thank them for the article and explain why comments about shooting down F-16s are a sore spot at this particular time.
 

mikeyd

Old Rocketeer
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
784
Reaction score
49
I enjoyed the article, except for the F16 comment. I think it was well written, seemed to be from the view point of a spectator, not a participant. Over all I think it is a postive article showing the excitement of our hobby! I also enjoyed that my sons Blue Crayon made it to the photo of the mass launch, it is at the far left of the page, half way up. We got a kick out of seeing it.

Here is a link to my level 1 flight with it.
http://members.cox.net/shortckt4/Rockets1.html#crayon

Happy Flying!
 
Top