Spool Rocket Parody

[ScrapDaddy]

Hey guys, i figured i'd do a scratch last minute for the April LPR contest, and do NOT ASK WHAT GAVE ME THE IDEA Anywho, this would be a good time to see if this is basically a spool, if not, i am in big trouble when it comes to stability....... Anyway, here is a few pictures after completion

 

[Micromeister]

Hey guys, i figured i'd do a scratch last minute for the April LPR contest, and do NOT ASK WHAT GAVE ME THE IDEA Anywho, this would be a good time to see if this is basically a spool, if not, i am in big trouble when it comes to stability....... Anyway, here is a few pictures after completion

You'll need to add at least one end plate for this thing to be a spool rocket SD. without a solid surface your not going to get the base drag needed to keep the thing stable until burnout. It'll still be a funny Odd-Roc flight though. Be safe, make sure everyone in the area knows whats going on.

Keep em Flyin Micronized or a little ODD

 

[shrox]

If you let it unroll, it just might work. Of course, the trailing paper will probably catch fire.

 

[cjl]

As micro said, you'll need at least one endplate for it to be stable. As is, it's just a cylinder, and that won't be stable.

 

[green dragon]

get a nice big clear plastic end, so as not to ruin the look, and you'll be fine.

 

[Gillard]

https://www.rocketreviews.com/reviews/all/scratch_senior_prank.shtml

 

[Der Red Max]

You'll need to add at least one end plate for this thing to be a spool rocket SD...

As micro said, you'll need at least one endplate for it to be stable. As is, it's just a cylinder, and that won't be stable.

get a nice big clear plastic end, so as not to ruin the look, and you'll be fine.

He'll need 2 of them (fore and aft) for it to preform like a spool rocket, otherwise, it will fly more saucer-like with just 1 larger endplate.

 

[hcmbanjo]

Hey Scrapdaddy, good post!

This might work for an endplate, for both ends.
It's that clear plastic cover from a blank CD package. You'd have to cut off the longer side wall, but at the top it fits a new roll of T.P. perfectly! Being clear, you only see the toilet paper roll fly.
The top of the cover (in the picture, the toilet paper is sitting in) has a clear lip that surrounds the edges of the roll.

Now, on to recovery. At ejection, try to get it to unroll (without tearing) like a long streamer.

 

[cjl]

Hey Scrapdaddy, good post!

This might work for an endplate, for both ends.
It's that clear plastic cover from a blank CD package. You'd have to cut off the longer side wall, but at the top it fits a new roll of T.P. perfectly! Being clear, you only see the toilet paper roll fly.
The top of the cover (in the picture, the toilet paper is sitting in) has a clear lip that surrounds the edges of the roll.

Now, on to recovery. At ejection, try to get it to unroll (without tearing) like a long streamer.

That wouldn't work as an endplate for stability though. For an endplate to add stability, it would need to actually stick out beyond the diameter of the toilet paper.

 

[hcmbanjo]

To cjl,
You're right about the endplate. I stand corrected!
I just thought it was interesting that the CD cover fit the width of the TP roll.

 

[MarkII]

SD's Flying Roll of TP was done as an entry in the April "Should Not Fly" contest. I think that it is, in fact, a daring idea. I have seen toilet paper incorporated into any number of odd-roc designs, but I have never seen anyone ever try to make a complete actual roll fly without any obvious structural augmentation, like fins or an added airframe. Now I can't tell for sure from the video, but it looks like the roll, with that motor at least, was stable during the very brief boost. It was also seriously underpowered and was not technically a kosher flight because it came in ballistic without any means of slowing its descent. So what it needs now is some structural augmentation to allow it to be stable with a more powerful motor. This will allow it to be boosted higher so that it gets a real flight and also so that it can deploy a recovery devbice and make a safe return.

I have a couple of ideas that might work for that.

MK

 

[MarkII]

To cjl,
You're right about the endplate. I stand corrected!
I just thought it was interesting that the CD cover fit the width of the TP roll.

Buit don't throw out that cover just yet...

MK

 

[ScrapDaddy]

SD's Flying Roll of TP was done as an entry in the April "Should Not Fly" contest. I think that it is, in fact, a daring idea. I have seen toilet paper incorporated into any number of odd-roc designs, but I have never seen anyone ever try to make a complete actual roll fly without any obvious structural augmentation, like fins or an added airframe. Now I can't tell for sure from the video, but it looks like the roll, with that motor at least, was stable during the very brief boost. It was also seriously underpowered and was not technically a kosher flight because it came in ballistic without any means of slowing its descent. So what it needs now is some structural augmentation to allow it to be stable with a more powerful motor. This will allow it to be boosted higher so that it gets a real flight and also so that it can deploy a recovery devbice and make a safe return.

I have a couple of ideas that might work for that.

MK

Well, first things first, you were all wrong when you said it needed an endplate, [YOUTUBE]_lW8p8-y1K0[/YOUTUBE] And finaly, it utilizes Featherweight recovery It was marginaly stable on a "A" motor, i have yet to try it on a "C"

 

[MarkII]

If it was a full roll of toilet paper (weight = 6.5 oz.), then it was too heavy (by a factor of 10) to recover via featherlight recovery. That fact is borne out by your video, which shows the roll dropping like a rock as soon as the motor stops thrusting. Furthermore, rockets using featherlight recovery eject their motors prior to starting their descent. Your rocket dropped back down to the ground before the ejection charge even fired. End result: disqualification due to recovery failure. Sorry, pal, but you're out of the competition. Thanks for playing, though. Have a safe trip home.

MK

 

[ScrapDaddy]

Where does it say that you must eject the motor and the weight limit for featherwieght?

 

[cjl]

Well, first things first, you were all wrong when you said it needed an endplate, [YOUTUBE]_lW8p8-y1K0[/YOUTUBE] And finaly, it utilizes Featherweight recovery It was marginaly stable on a "A" motor, i have yet to try it on a "C"

More likely it was so underpowered on an A motor that it didn't have time to go unstable before the motor burned out.

 

[ScrapDaddy]

More likely it was so underpowered on an A motor that it didn't have time to go unstable before the motor burned out.

I think I can envision a D3 working here, anyone else agree?

 

[cjl]

Umm...

Heck no.

 

[ScrapDaddy]

Umm...

Heck no.

Wait, is it high thrust that's makeing this unstable or is it aft weight?

 

[Micromeister]

Where does it say that you must eject the motor and the weight limit for featherwieght?

Perhaps in the term "FEATHERWEIGHT". Sometimes your Lack of understanding is somewhat upsetting.

To be considered "featherweight" recovery the model MUST Float down similar to that of a Feather on the wind. Yet another example of stuff you should have already READ in your Model Rocket Handbook.

Tumble recovery is the little more open to interperatation but Still the mass of a roll of TP is and should be, well beyond anyones acceptable limit.

Rmemeber SD: it is NOT you we are concerned about...it's the safety of unsuspecting by-standers or the general public.
Safety first Always.

 

[ScrapDaddy]

Well, I don't consider it dangerous for several reasons, I have my neighbors a good 45 feet, and the rocket only hit 15 feet, tops, and due to Tartaglia's law, the rocket could only travel up to 30 feet horizontally, if it should somehow point 45 degrees, but it only weathercocked to about 15 degrees, and therefore, was at no risk to the bystanders. Oh and Micromeister, to prove I have to book, turn to page 105